1 <Day 20 Tuesday, 15th February 2000. 2< Professor Evans, recalled. 3< Cross-Examined by Mr Irving, continued. 4MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving? 5MR IRVING: May it please the court. I have placed in your 6Lordship's bundle F a continuation of about 20 or 30 7pages, and I have also provided your Lordship, as you have 8just noticed, with a copy of Nuremberg to which we were 9referring to yesterday. 10MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, I see that. Thank you. 11MR IRVING: And if we can just take up one or two of the points 12your Lordship requested yesterday? Your Lordship 13requested a copy of what the pull-down menu says. That is 14in the bundle which I have just given you, bundle F. It 15is at the back of bundle F which your Lordship was using 16yesterday. 17MR JUSTICE GRAY: The pull-down menu, where do I find that? 18MR IRVING: If you go to page 93 of bundle F, my Lord, it 19should be -- unless the numbering has gone wrong. 20MR JUSTICE GRAY: I had this in a different form yesterday, did 21I not, from Mr Rampton? 22MR IRVING: Well, I did not have it yesterday from Mr Rampton. 23MR JUSTICE GRAY: Did you not? Well, I got something. 24MR IRVING: It is difficult to obtain, but that is the works of 25it, in what is called HTML. 26MR JUSTICE GRAY: Having looked through it, whilst we are on

. P-2

1this, it did appear to me that whatever their titles may 2be, they are mostly Jewish organisations of one kind or 3another. 4MR IRVING: My Lord, that is not correct. If you look at the 5list, there are 16 items, of which seven are not, if I can 6put it like that. 7MR RAMPTON: I do not think we have 16. 8MR IRVING: That is precisely why your Lordship should be 9looking at my pull-down menu rather than the one given to 10you. Shall I read through them? 11MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not think that would serve any 12particularly useful purpose. 13MR IRVING: No. But your Lordship will notice the Australian 14Government, the Centre for Democratic Renewal, the 15Coalition for Human Dignity, the German Government. 16MR RAMPTON: There are only two I think that are not Jewish, my 17Lord. 18MR IRVING: Searchlight ---- 19MR RAMPTON: Two National Governments. 20MR IRVING: Well, Mr Rampton, if you would just allow me to 21finish reading out those that are not Jewish that are on 22the list? 23MR JUSTICE GRAY: You read out the ones you say are not Jewish. 24MR IRVING: I will start again. Australian Government, Centre 25for Democratic Renewal. 26MR RAMPTON: That is Jewish.

. P-3

1MR IRVING: I beg your pardon? 2MR RAMPTON: It is Jewish. 3MR JUSTICE GRAY: Let him read them, Mr Rampton, then we can 4debate it further, if needs be. 5MR IRVING: Coalition for Human Dignity, the German Government, 6Searchlight, and Surf Watch Internet Censorship. 7MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. 8MR IRVING: Each of those, if you would click on that, you 9would come to a subindex, my Lord, which has the actual 10documents which qualified for inclusion in the list of 11enemies of free speech. 12MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. I think this is in a way dicing with 13words because I have actually got the indices supplied 14yesterday. It appears to me, without knowing in detail 15what the individual items on the indices are, that really 16all of these organizations, there is a great deal of 17interplay, put it like that, between these organizations 18and what you would, perhaps, describe as the Jewish 19lobby. Is that not fair? 20MR IRVING: In some of the documents quite clearly there is, in 21some of the documents listed on the index, and, obviously, 22I then have to make the point that this is a website which 23has been set up in response to the attack on me. 24MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, I follow. 25MR IRVING: So, clearly, this is not a global attempt to 26address all the world enemies of free speech when,

. P-4

1undoubtedly, you bring in the Chinese Government and all 2sorts of other ghastly organizations, but these are the 3bodies that have impinged on my professional career. That 4is why they figure on my personal list of traditional 5enemies of free speech. 6MR JUSTICE GRAY: I follow that. I think I interrupted 7Mr Rampton. Did you want to add anything? 8MR RAMPTON: I was just going to say, Mr Irving has identified 9as being not Jewish I think four that, in fact, are 10Jewish. The only two that are not that we can tell are 11the Australian and the German governments. 12MR IRVING: Perhaps you should say which of the four that you 13consider are Jewish. 14MR RAMPTON: All the rest are Jewish. 15MR IRVING: Centre for Democratic Renewal? 16MR RAMPTON: Yes. 17MR IRVING: A Jewish body? 18MR RAMPTON: Yes -- so I am told. 19MR JUSTICE GRAY: We may or may not come back to that at some 20later stage. Let us leave it for the moment. I cannot 21actually find my bundle F. 22MR IRVING: I asked your clerk, my Lord, this morning to put 23the fresh documents into it. 24MR JUSTICE GRAY: I then think I said not for the time being 25until I know that is what everybody thinks is right. 26MR IRVING: Your Lordship will need bundle F9, in fact.

. P-5

1MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not seem to have F. Yes. So I put this 2in the back? 3MR IRVING: That is correct, my Lord. Mr Rampton's 4intervention, of course, has highlighted the problem that 5I face in view of the fact that the representative of the 6Centre for Democratic Renewal and the Coalition for Human 7Dignity who gave statements relied which have been relied 8upon by Professor Levin, those statements are not sworn. 9They are just put in by way of evidence. They are relied 10on by Professor Levin. Professor Levin is not going to 11give oral evidence, so I cannot test the validity of any 12of the statements that Mr Rampton has made or any of the 13statements these witnesses have made. 14MR JUSTICE GRAY: Professor Levin, who is not coming to give 15evidence, I had understood (and perhaps I am wrong about 16this and perhaps we can clarify now) that his report is no 17longer relied on. 18MR RAMPTON: No, that is not right. There is a Civil Evidence 19Act Notice. 20MR JUSTICE GRAY: For an expert? 21MR RAMPTON: Yes, in respect of that. What weight it has is 22another question, but it has to be a 1968 Act Notice 23because this case was started before the 1995 Act came 24into force. So there is a Civil Evidence Act statement in 25respect of Professor Levin. 26MR JUSTICE GRAY: It is highly unusual to have an expert's

. P-6

1report subject to the Civil Evidence Act. 2MR RAMPTON: It may be unusual but ---- 3MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not know whether I have ever heard of it 4before. 5MR RAMPTON: --- there is nothing the matter with it in 6principle. 7MR JUSTICE GRAY: That may be right. 8MR IRVING: It does place me at a serious disadvantage, of 9course. 10MR JUSTICE GRAY: I know. Actually, I thought the disadvantage 11was less great than it now appears to be because I had 12wrongly taken it (and I am glad I have now discovered my 13error) that the Defendants were not any longer relying on 14Levin and Eatwell. 15MR RAMPTON: If I can say this, quite frankly, I do not myself 16believe I need to depend very heavily on Professor Levin 17anyway for ---- 18MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think that is probably right. 19MR RAMPTON: --- quite different reasons. The factual 20witnesses probably, so far as the United States and Canada 21are concerned, are more important. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. To help you with your difficulty, 23Mr Irving, can I suggest this, that when you come to be 24cross-examined, as you will be I think on ---- 25MR IRVING: Next week sometime. 26MR JUSTICE GRAY: --- the sort of rogues' gallery point, if

. P-7

1I can rudely call it that, namely your associating with 2these extremists. 3MR IRVING: Guilt by association. 4MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, well, that is the way you put it. I am 5not sure it is as simple as that. 6MR IRVING: It is the way Morland J would put it probably too. 7MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, you might then take the opportunity, 8either in cross-examination or perhaps re-examining 9yourself, to make the points you are wanting to make in 10reference to Professor Levin or Dr Levin's report. 11MR IRVING: I was proposing to make it by way of submission. 12MR JUSTICE GRAY: All right. You can do it that way as well or 13instead, rather. 14MR IRVING: But is a rather unfortunate halfway house that he 15is going to partly rely on Mr Levin's report, and we have 16no way of knowing which part he is relying on and which 17part he is not. Either he should or he should not, in my 18view, my Lord, and your Lordship may wish to make a ruling 19on that. 20MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, you may want to make the application 21that it is not legitimate for a party to use the Civil 22Evidence Act machinery to avoid having the expert witness 23in question called and cross-examined. 24MR IRVING: Now that we are under the CPR, as we are, I think 25it should be either or. 26MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well I am not going to that now because

. P-8

1Professor Evans is, no doubt, wanting to get on with his 2evidence, but if you want to make that application, feel 3free to do so. But, as I say, I think it is unusual. 4Yes, now, are we ready to resume? 5MR IRVING: One more minor matter, your Lordship asked to see 6the index of the Hitler's War books, the new version, and 7that also appended as -- it is the very last page of what 8you have. 9MR JUSTICE GRAY: When you say the "new" version, the one that 10is about to come out? 11MR IRVING: No, this was an index we commissioned for the 1991 12edition, in other words, it is a fuller index for 1991. 13MR JUSTICE GRAY: I see. 14MR IRVING: It has now been superceded because we are about to 15do a completely updated edition. 16MR JUSTICE GRAY: So this is just the extract dealing with... 17MR IRVING: That, I presume, is the page that your Lordship was 18interested in. 19MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, you are quite right. 20MR IRVING: Also, finally, my Lord, if you look two items back 21from that, your Lordship will find The Spectator. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: Is this "as many as"? 23MR IRVING: "As many as", yes, my Lord. Your Lordship will see 24that I was absolutely correct; either Professor Eatwell or 25Professor Levin or both omitted the word which completely 26reversed the meaning.

. P-9

1MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. Professor Evans, this is a point at 2which I think you ought to join in, if I can put it like 3that. I think, Mr Irving, the point he made yesterday is 4right? 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It is right, yes, indeed. 6MR IRVING: Is it right to say that I, therefore, did not 7double the death roll by means of the comparison, in 8fact? I adhered to a death roll in Hamburg of up to or 9nearly 50,000? 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That is right, yes. 11MR JUSTICE GRAY: Not, I think, your error, but Professor 12Eatwell's? 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It looks like it, my Lord. 14MR IRVING: My Lord, the problem is Professor Evans' report has 15turned out to be a bit of a dummy minefield. I am 16advancing into it, but very gingerly, because I do not 17know where the real mines are and where the dummies are 18like that one, and this is what is delaying us. 19MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am not sure I accept any of that, but let 20us move on anyway. We have got to about 100? 21MR IRVING: 128, my Lord, is where I propose to continue, my 22Lord. I am on 128 at paragraph 4, Professor Evans. 23MR JUSTICE GRAY: You are still on the topic of Holocaust 24denial, are you not? 25MR IRVING: We are, my Lord, and we are dealing just briefly 26with the experiment made with the gas vans. Your Lordship

. P-10

1was concerned that I described this as an experiment in 2view of the large numbers. So Professor Evans has quoted 3me as saying, "So I accept that this kind of experiment 4was made on a very limited scale". Do you agree that 5there was, in fact, an experiment, Professor Evans, the 6use of the gas vans for a limited period of months on the 7Eastern Front and elsewhere? 8A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
You go on to say: "But, I don't accept that the gas 9chambers existed, and this is well known. I've seen no 10evidence at all that gas chambers existed". So what I am 11saying there in that quotation is that you say that 12gassing took place on a very limited scale, experimental 13scale, but, as you say, it was rapidly abandoned as being 14a totally inefficient way of killing people. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. 16A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I understand that during the trial you have now admitted 17that that was wrong, that it was, that gassing was not 18merely used on a limited experimental scale. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
You are overlooking the use of loaded words like 20"conceded" and "admitted". Do you accept that, 21therefore, the gas vans were used as an experimental basis 22for killing, and that they were abandoned then for 23whatever reason afterwards? 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, I do not. They were used for killing on a large 25scale, as I think---- 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
Did they continue using them throughout the war or did

. P-11

1they stop? 2A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
There was a transition to mainly using gas chambers, but 3they were used on far more than a limited scale, as 4I believe you yourself have said in the course of this 5trial. 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
Looking purely at the word "experimental" at this point, 7you have agreed that Professor Burrin, the Swiss Professor 8is something of an expert. He is not an extremist or what 9you call a Holocaust denier. 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That is so, yes. 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
I just put to you one sentence from his standard work on 12this. This is on page 112 of Philip Burrin: "The gas 13truck had been an improvised response to a situation no 14one had foreseen or imagined". Would you agree with that? 15A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I would have to see the whole passage. I find it 16difficult to comment simply on a single sentence taken out 17of that. In any case, the context of this section of my 18report is concerned with your denial that gas chambers 19existed, that gas chambers were used. That is the 20context. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
Before we move on, just a simple answer. You do accept 22therefore that the gas vans were used and then abandoned 23at some stage as a means of killing? 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, yes. In the end of course the gas chambers were 25abandoned as a means of killing when they had fulfilled 26their purpose. I do not accept----

. P-12

1MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, I just want to see where we are 2going occasionally. 3MR IRVING: That was the end of that. 4MR JUSTICE GRAY: At an earlier stage in this case -- correct 5me if I am recollecting wrongly -- you were presented 6with a document which indicated that at Chelmno 97,000 7Jews were killed in five weeks. 8MR RAMPTON: Five months, my Lord. 9MR JUSTICE GRAY: I agree you did not accept that figure was 10correct, but I believe you did accept in terms that the 11gas vans were not used on a solely experimental basis but 12were used for the systematic killing of substantial 13numbers of Jews. 14MR IRVING: They were. I do not agree that they were used only 15at Chelmno. They were certainly used once at Chelmno 16because there was an explosion there, but there is no 17evidence they were used only there. 18MR JUSTICE GRAY: I did not say "only there". I am using that 19as an illustration of what I had understood you to have 20accepted earlier in this case. 21MR IRVING: I am trying to justify the use of the word 22"experimental" by the virtue of the fact that other 23historians of reputation have also described this as being 24an interim phase and it was abandoned, as it proved not to 25be a very feasible or practical way of doing things. 26MR JUSTICE GRAY: That may be rather a different thing from

. P-13

1saying it is experimental, but there we are. 2MR IRVING: I think that you had fastened on the word 3"experimental" as being something repugnant in this 4particular connection and I can appreciate that, but I was 5just trying to establish what was meant by the word 6"experimental". 7 Can we now proceed to paragraph 6 on the same 8page 128, where we are talking about the subsequent Polish 9tests which attempted to replicate the Leuchter tests. 10You say that I allege that there was a refusal of the 11authorities to call for site examinations and that 12forensic tests were carried out by the Poles, but the 13results were suppressed". Is that correct in the last 14four lines on page 128? 15A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
Are you suggesting that I have got it wrong somehow? 17A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
In this paragraph I am trying to sum up your views as 18succinctly as I can. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
Do you accept that the Poles did carry out tests and 20suppress them? 21A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, I do not. I have to say I am not an expert on 22Auschwitz and there has been a separate, as I call 23attention to at the top of the next page 130, expert 24witness report by Professor van Pelt, who is an expert on 25Auschwitz, who goes into this in very great detail. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. So we will not dwell very long on this, but would

. P-14

1you go to page 56 of the little bundle, which is the first 2page of the Polish report I am referring to. We are going 3to look at two dates on it. 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
It is a Polish document. I am told that the date at the 6top in Polish means 24th September 1990, and that is the 7date that the report was submitted by this Polish 8Institute to the museum at Auschwitz, as you can see in 9the address line on the top right quarter. If you look in 10the rubber stamp box, can you see a date on the final 11line? 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Indeed, 11.10.1990. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
Did the Polish State authority, the Auschwitz authorities, 14at any time thereafter publish that report, or did it sit 15in their safe for some months and years? 16A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am not an expert on this subject. I cannot really 17comment. I think probably, if one consulted Professor van 18Pelt's report, one would be able to clear that up. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
You spent a whole page -- again on the foot of page 129 20you say that Irving went on to claim that Dr Piper, in 21other words the Auschwitz State Museum, had suppressed the 22fact and filed the report away. 23A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, I say that. 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
You disqualify the Leuchter report in your view. I have 25to ask you these questions because it is said that I have 26relied on the Leuchter report and that this was an

. P-15

1unjustifiable act of a responsible historian. 2MR JUSTICE GRAY: You do not have to ask these questions. I 3have already indicated that on Auschwitz -- I know it is 4referred to in Professor Evans' report -- it does not 5appear to me that, if I may respectfully say so, Professor 6Evans' opinions really bulk very large. I think that is 7really Professor van Pelt. So do not feel you have to ask 8these questions. 9MR IRVING: I would like to ask him purely then about one 10matter. Is it right that you suggest that the report was 11not admitted as evidence at the Toronto trial, and that 12this in some way discredits the report? 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, I cannot see that in my report. I say it was 14discredited at the Zundel trial in 1988. That is my 15understanding, having read some of the transcripts of the 16trial. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
Was the report actually admitted as evidence of the Zundel 18trial? 19MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think we know it was, do we not? We can 20move on. 21MR IRVING: The point that I am trying to make, my Lord, is 22that I have had considerable dealings overnight with the 23Canadian solicitors involved in that action who confirmed 24to me -- I just put the essential three lines of their 25letter to you. The solicitor Barbara Kulaska has written 26to me saying that the Leuchter report itself was not filed

. P-16

1as an exhibit for the sole reason that such engineering 2reports are not generally admissible under Canadian rules 3of evidence unless the other side consents. 4MR JUSTICE GRAY: I treat that with a certain amount of 5scepticism. The evidence up to now is that it was not 6admitted in evidence at the Zundel trial because it was 7not accepted that Leuchter was suitably qualified as an 8expert. 9MR IRVING: My Lord, with the utmost respect, I have to say 10that I have a very large bundle here now which contains 11the actual transcript on that matter between the 12prosecution and the defence and the court in Toronto. 13MR JUSTICE GRAY: Shall we put that on one side? I do not 14suppose Mr Rampton has had a chance to look at what you 15are referring to me at the moment. At any rate, let us 16got on with Professor Evans. I am not shutting you out 17from adducing that evidence. 18MR IRVING: I am prepared to make this transcript available to 19the Defence in this matter. 20MR RAMPTON: I have the transcript. I used it in 21cross-examination of Mr Irving. It is perfectly clear the 22judge would not admit Mr Leuchter as an expert. 23MR JUSTICE GRAY: What you have not seen is what Mr Irving is 24relying on from the Canadian lawyers giving an entirely 25different reason why. 26MR RAMPTON: I have seen it. There is a one page letter

. P-17

1I think in this new bundle. 2MR JUSTICE GRAY: What I am suggesting is that Mr Irving 3follows this up later. 4MR RAMPTON: Yes, I agree. I attach no weight to what the 5lawyer says at all. 6MR JUSTICE GRAY: Rather than now. 7MR IRVING: Whether Mr Rampton attaches weight to it or not is 8neither here nor there. In that case I shall put it to 9your Lordship by way of submission later on. 10MR JUSTICE GRAY: Would you mind. 11MR IRVING: At page 130 line 8 you say that my arguments derive 12from previous work from well-known Holocaust deniers, and 13then you mention some. 14A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
Professor Faurisson. . Are you familiar with the 16expertise of Germar Rudolf? 17A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I mention Faurisson there. I do not mention Rudolf there. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
I can make this very brief. Can you accept that there are 19a number of other documentary bases on which I base my 20arguments, for example the air photographs as interpreted 21by a man called John Ball? 22A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It is clear I think that in the documents that I cite you 23do rely heavily upon Faurisson, whose work you did read in 24the late 1980s, as you recall in your diary. 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
Which works of Professor Faurisson do you allege that 26I read?

. P-18

1A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It was an article in your diary entry of 26th July 1986. 2You wrote "Faurisson's paper on Auschwitz set me thinking 3very hard." I presume that is an article that he 4published or a paper that he gave to you. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
Are you suggesting that he is my only source, the only 6basis of my arguments that I do not rely---- 7A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, I am not. I give that as an example there. 8Q.
[Mr Irving]
When is set thinking very hard, as no doubt you have also 9been occasionally made to think very hard, you then start 10looking at other sources to see how one should finally 11align one's own political or scientific or historical 12viewpoint. 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. I say here that it derives from previous work by 14well-known Holocaust deniers such as Faurisson. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
Would you call Professor Hinsley a well-known Holocaust 16denier? 17A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not think that these arguments, the arguments are 18derived -- you misuse Professor Hinsley's material in your 19work. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
But you have here referred of course only to Professor 21Faurisson. Does that imply that he was my only source of 22any change of mind or new direction of my thinking that 23I may have adopted? 24MR JUSTICE GRAY: "Such as" are the words used. 25A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
"Such as", yes. You were familiar with the brochure, Did 266 million really die, by Richard Verul of the National

. P-19

1Front published under the pseudonym of Richard Harwood. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
You are saying I am very familiar with it. When did 3I become familiar with it? 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
You note in 1988 that you said in the Zundel trial in the 5evidence you gave over 90 per cent of the brochure is 6factually accurate. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
Have you also read in the diary that the Verul report was 8given to me to read one day before I gave evidence, and 9that I looked at it the same as you look at documents here 10in order to be able to form an opinion of it? 11A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am saying you read it, Mr Irving. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes, but are you suggesting that I thought it out and read 13it and then used it as a basis for my arguments? 14MR JUSTICE GRAY: He cannot possibly answer that, can he? 15MR IRVING: I mean, the allegation, the suggestion, the 16imputation, from the witness is that I have read it and 17used it as a source when, in fact, I read it as an expert 18witness has to read documents that are put to him. 19MR JUSTICE GRAY: You just said you were familiar with it, 20Mr Irving. 21MR IRVING: I had sufficient familiarity with it on the basis 22of 24 hours study in order to be able answer questions as 23an expert witness. This is the point I wish to put to 24him. If the witness makes a statement like that, which is 25intended to create an impression, then I am surely 26entitled to rectify the impression.

. P-20

1MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, you cannot ask him questions to which 2he obviously cannot possibly know the answer. 3MR IRVING: My Lord, he can because the reference to this 4particular report is in my diaries which he has just 5quoted from and it makes quite plain that the Verul(?) 6Report was submitted to me. It was put to me by the 7Defence counsel to read in order that I could answer 8questions on it when I came into the box. 9MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, what is the answer? 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am not sure what the question was, my Lord. 11MR IRVING: Are you familiar with, have you read my diary and 12do you accept that, in fact, the Verul report was put to 13me purely for that purpose? 14A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That is what your diary says. I am familiar with the 15diary entry. The fact is that you read the report and you 16judged it 90 per cent correct. Similarly, you are 17familiar with the work of another Holocaust denier, 18Dr Wilhelm Steglisch which you have commented on on a 19number of occasions. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
Notwithstanding your desire to move on to other matters, 21can we deal with one thing at a time and say that a number 22of documents have been put to you by me in the last few 23days, is that is right? 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That is right. 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
Would you find it repugnant if people said you have 26relied on these documents that I have put to you and that

. P-21

1you have read these Irving documents and that, 2therefore ---- 3MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, please, come on. It is just 4becoming unhelpful and argumentative. Let us get on to 5what matters. I say that for, I should think, the 12th 6time. 7MR IRVING: 132, Professor, page 132, line 4. I am afraid 8I have to demolish this witness in detail, my Lord. It is 9the only way I can do it. 10MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, I am sorry, I am intervening more 11than I want to, but I have told you before that on 12Auschwitz I do not regard Professor Evans as being, if 13I may say so, authoritative. Therefore, you do not have 14to ask interminable questions about Auschwitz. What 15matters starts at about page 150, as I have said many 16times before. 17MR IRVING: If I am accused of putting things into documents 18which are not in the documents, this goes to the root of 19one of the principal libels on my name, my Lord. That is 20in line 4. That is why I will ask this witness now to go 21to page 57 of the bundle and see the document to which I 22am referring. 23MR JUSTICE GRAY: Page 54. 24MR IRVING: Page 57. Is this an invoice for the supply of 25Zyklon-B to Auschwitz concentration camp? 26A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, it appears to be.

. P-22

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
Do you in your report say: "It makes no mention at all of 2pest control"? 3A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, I do, yes. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
Would you now look at line 5 of the invoice, the typed 5portion? Do you agree that it says: "This material was 6sent to Auschwitz Abteilung, Entwesung und" ---- 7A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. My mistake, Mr Irving. 8Q.
[Mr Irving]
This is your mistake? 9A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
So, in other words, I did not fake and I did not distort 11and I did not insert and I did not manipulate on that 12particular document? 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Let me read the paragraph. "The plates", we are still on 14the plates of your Nuremberg book, and the caption says: 15"Tonnes of Zyclon-B pellets, containing poisonous 16hydrogen cyanide, are shipped by the Degesch factory to 17the Pest Control division of Auschwitz and other camps 18including Oraneinburg in 1944". The delivery note, though, 19only concerns Auschwitz. I agree I overlooked the mention 20of the pest control in Auschwitz, but it does not affect 21the other camps. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
It does not affects the other camp? But that is not the 23point I am making here. It is just that once again I have 24been accused of distorting and manipulating and you have 25now admitted that you are wrong? 26A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, no ----

. P-23

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
Just as on the Spectator letter and other things. 2A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
--- because you are illustrating, you have an illustration 3there of a note to Auschwitz and you are making claims on 4the basis of it about other camps. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
I am not going to put to you all the other invoices which 6I have in the file which show deliveries to the other 7camps which makes the point. But the point I am making 8here, will you accept that, is purely that you wrongly 9accused me of mistranslating or distorting a document? 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not think I wrongly -- and I admit I am wrong on that 11point, yes. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
Thank you. 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I have already admitted that. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
Footnote 60, very briefly, you reference there the 15Gerstein report. Will you now accept that the Gerstein 16report has been totally discredited by the people you call 17the Holocaust deniers because of the figures and ludicrous 18facts it contains? 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, I will not, no. As I have said, I am not an expert on 20this subject, but it is a report that is -- I will not 21accept simply on your word, that it has been discredited. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
The next footnote, No. 61, you refer to an interview 23between me and Radio Ulster, but, unfortunately, is not 24produced in any of the bundle of documents, so it is 25difficult for me to judge how accurate this is. 26MR JUSTICE GRAY: Can you help about that, Professor Evans?

. P-24

1A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I cannot, I am afraid. 2Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
Do you know where the transcript is? 3A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am unable to locate it, but we can quite well dispense 4with that. There are plenty of other statements here on 5which we can rely, as in the very next sentence: "There 6were no gas chambers in Auschwitz" as you said on 5th 7March 1990. 8MR IRVING: Are you familiar with the distinction between 9Auschwitz and Birkenhau? 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think we have been through this in this case, Mr Irving, 11and that ---- 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
No, but I am asking you. Are you familiar ---- 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It is generally understood that when one talks about 14Auschwitz, one talks about the whole complex of all the 15various camps inside covered by the name of Auschwitz. 16When one talks about Birkenhau, that includes Birkenhau. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
Have you been to Auschwitz? 18A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I have not been to Auschwitz. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
So I cannot ask you and there is no point in my asking you 20questions about that. You refer on page 133 to the shower 21baths? 22A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am not, really not an expert on this. What I am trying 23to do here is to assemble evidence that you have denied 24that there are gas chambers, there were gas chambers 25in ---- 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
I am placed at a disadvantage and I appreciate his

. P-25

1Lordship's impatience with this procedure, but you have 2rambled on for pages in your report about Auschwitz and 3included numerous false statements and I am trying to 4proceed at speed, but every time I ask you you say you are 5not an expert on this. 6A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
What I am trying to do here is to include and present 7numerous statements of yours to the effect that gas 8chambers were not used, did not exist, and so on, at 9Auschwitz and elsewhere. I presented a substantial number 10of these statements here. I do not really propose to read 11them out. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, I am afraid you will have to do what I ask under 13cross-examination. One of them is look at line 1 at page 14134, please. 15A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
"On 8th November 1990 he", that is Irving, "repeated the 17same claim to an audience in Toronto: 'The gas chambers 18that are shown to the tourists in Auschwitz are fakes'." 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
Do you now agree that this is true? 21A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It is true that you said that. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: Do we have to go through this again? You say 23fake, Mr Rampton says reconstruction. I have the point. 24MR IRVING: This is my way of now introducing a cardinal 25document which is on pages 59 and 60, my Lord, on which 26I shall very definitely rely. It is a visit by a very

. P-26

1well-known French news magazine called L'Expresse on the 2anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz. On page 60 3there is the admission that everything in it is fake, and 4they do not know how to tell the tourists this. 5MR RAMPTON: I really do not know where this is going. This 6was not put to Professor van Pelt who made it perfectly 7clear that the single gas chamber at Auschwitz (i), 8Sturmlager, is a post-war reconstruction and he 9explained ---- 10MR IRVING: It is a postwar reconstruction. 11MR RAMPTON: He explained how it had been done and that the 12beginning and the end of that story. How Professor Evans 13is expected to deal with this, I do not know. 14MR JUSTICE GRAY: The difficulty, as you know, is that one does 15have the section on Auschwitz. That is the problem. 16MR RAMPTON: I know, but, as your Lordship knows, as I have 17shown your Lordship already and Mr Irving has been in 18court, again and again Mr Irving has referred to gas 19chambers in the plural, not just at Auschwitz but 20elsewhere. 21MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, I just have never from the word go 22understood the point that you make about these so-called 23fake gas chambers. 24MR RAMPTON: There are two points, my Lord. First of all, 25Mr Rampton calls it a "reconstruction", I call it a 26"fake". The second point is if I am accused of having a

. P-27

1criminal conviction in Germany, which is used against me 2by the Defence, I am entitled to point out the criminal 3conviction is for saying precisely this sentence and it 4turns out to be true. 5MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am not remotely interested in your criminal 6conviction in Germany. I simply am not. 7MR IRVING: I am indebted to your Lordship for saying that 8because the Defence has repeatedly referred to it ---- 9MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am now going to rule that you get on. 10Please, Mr Irving, this is enough about Auschwitz. I just 11do not think that there is anything to be gained by any 12further cross-examination on Auschwitz. You have spent a 13long time on it. 14MR IRVING: Just about Auschwitz or about the Final Solution, 15my Lord? 16MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am not stopping you on the Final Solution. 17MR IRVING: Page 134. "Systematic nature of the 18extermination". You take exception to my suggestion that 19Jews were the victims of a large number of rather 20run-of-the-mill criminal elements, and I mention there the 21Latvians, Lithuanians and Estonians? 22A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
And Austrians. 23Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
And Germans. 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
Are you familiar with the report by Jan Karski who was one 26of the first people to report on the Final Solution?

. P-28

1A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Not -- I am not, no. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
In that case I cannot ask you about it. On page 135, 3paragraph 3: "Irving's view that these local initiatives 4were excusable", is the word "excusable" excusable in this 5context? Have I ever tried to excuse what the Germans are 6doing to the Jews? 7A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, let me read what you told the press conference in 8Australia in 1986 which is the quote beginning halfway 9down the quote on the previous page where you say, you are 10questioning whether the killing of Jews "was a tragedy 11ordered and organized on the very highest German state 12level, namely by Hitler himself. Because if my hypothesis 13is correct, it means that all these Jews - and it may be 14any figure, I don't look at the figure concerned - if my 15hypothesis is correct, it indicates that the Jews were the 16victims of a large number of rather run-of-the-mill 17criminal elements which exist in Central Europe. Not just 18Germans, but Austrians, Latvians, Lithuanians, Estonians, 19feeding on the endemic antisemitism of the era and 20encouraged by the brutalization which war brought about 21anyway. These people had seen the bombing raids begin. 22They'd probably lost women, wives and children in the 23bombing raids. And they wanted to take revenge on 24someone. So when Hitler ordered the expulsion, as he did 25- there's no doubt that Hitler ordered the expulsion 26measures - these people took it out on the person that

. P-29

1they could". 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
And you say this is somebody excusing the Nazis for taking 3these ghastly actions against the Jews? 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It seems to me that that is the implication in that 5statement, yes. 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is it not, in fact, a very sloppy use of the English 7language? What you meant was not "excusable" but 8"explicable" and there is a very great difference between 9these two words? 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think, given your attitude -- well, first of all, I find 11it very difficult to see how Latvians, Lithuanians and 12Estonians could get so worked up by bombing raids on 13Germany that they started killing Jews. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is that what I say? 15A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It is the clear implication, "these people", and in the 16previous sentence you say, "Not just Germans, but 17Austrians, Latvians, Lithuanians and Estonians". "These 18people had seen the bombing raids begin". 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
Are you familiar with the fact that Jan Karski, the man 20whom I previously referred to, warned the Polish 21government of the likelihood of pogroms in the Baltic 22states, and he had explained the reasons why in a 1940 23report? 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Mr Irving, there is plenty of documentation to show that 25there were, that Latvians, Lithuanians and Estonians and 26so on were involved in the mass killing of Jews with the

. P-30

1encouragement of the SS unit and the Einsatzgruppen. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
But are you not by using the word "excusable" suggesting 3that David Irving said that what had happened to the Jews 4was right, that I am excusing it, whereas, in fact, I am 5explaining it and there is a substantial difference. Do 6you not agree? 7A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, I do not. I am afraid the tenor and tendency of your 8explanations is to find excuses. 9Q.
[Mr Irving]
So ---- 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
And you go on, and I go on to quote numerous places in the 11report at some length arguments which you put forward to 12try to suggest (and sometimes say in so many words) that 13the Jews were responsible themselves for the misfortunes 14which befell them. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
You still do not appear to appreciate the difference 16between the word ---- 17A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think this falls into a pattern. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
--- to excuse and to explain. Your use of the word 19"excusable" implies that David Irving welcomed the 20Holocaust, that I am excusing it; whereas I am explaining 21it by saying, "These people had a vengeance, these people 22had a grudge, these people felt wronged, these people took 23it out on the people they perceived as being the ones who 24did it". Is that an excuse or is that an explanation? 25A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think given the fact that they not been bombed, that is 26an excuse.

. P-31

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
I think we can abandon bombing for a moment and point to 2other things. I do not want to go into the reasons why 3the Baltic Jews had a particular grudge, but that is 4neither here nor there. 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, I think it is very much here or there. If you want 6to use as an explanation of the massacres of Jews by 7Baltic peoples, if you want to use in explanation of that 8allegations that you want to make about their maltreatment 9by Jews or justified -- or in some ways grievances that 10they had which were in some ways justified, that seems to 11me that you are excusing it. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
In other words, what you are saying is that I welcomed the 13Holocaust, is that the way you are trying to put it to the 14court? 15A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not use the word "welcome", Mr ---- 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, I am trying to understand why you use the word 17"excusable". If something is excusable, then this 18implies that the person who is making the excuses thinks 19it is a jolly good thing. 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, I do not think that is true actually. Those are two 21rather different things. Applauding something and 22excusing it are rather different things, Mr Irving, and 23I come back to this fact that you say, "These people had 24seen the bombing raids begin, they'd lost probably women, 25wives and children in the bombing raids". So these poor 26Estonians who had been subjected to allied bombings,

. P-32

1therefore, felt so angry with the Jews that they took it 2out on them. Now, I do not think there is evidence that 3Estonians were heavily bombed by the Allies in 1941. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
Forget the bombing raids for the time being. 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am not forgetting the bombing raids because that is a 6central passage -- a central part of this passage, 7Mr Irving. 8Q.
[Mr Irving]
My Lord, let me explain the reason why I am dealing with 9this at length. This is one of the issues pleaded. In 10the pleadings one of the complaints is that I am accused 11by the Second Defendant of having, I think, applauded the 12incarceration of the Jews in the concentration camps. 13MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not believe that she ever has made that 14accusation. What you are accused of in this part of the 15report is making excuses for those who took part in the 16---- 17MR IRVING: Finding something excusable rather than explicable, 18and there is a substantial difference there. I find the 19use of the word "excusable" which I hope the Professor 20will admit was a slip, but now he is trying to justify it? 21A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I will not admit it is a slip, no. I mean, I looked at 22this passage and it seems to me to excuse these massacres. 23MR JUSTICE GRAY: Speaking for myself, I think I understand the 24point you are making, Mr Irving, and I understand the 25answer as well. 26MR IRVING: In that case, I will now wish to speak another

. P-33

1paragraph about the explanation why the Baltic Jews took 2revenge on their native Jewish population during the brief 3interregnum between the time the Soviets moved out and the 4German Army arrived. Did you appreciate that there were 5substantial killings in that period? 6A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I would have to be provided with evidence, I think, to 7show that. 8Q.
[Mr Irving]
So you make the allegations without the evidence then? 9You say that the bombing raids and so on, you say they 10had, the Nazis, the Latvians and Lithuanians the Estonians 11had no ---- 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Let me set the context here, Mr Irving, is that I am 13talking about your denial that there was a systematic 14element in the Nazi extermination of Jews. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
You are going substantially further; you are saying that 16I am welcoming it, I am excusing it? 17A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not say you are welcoming it. Welcoming is different 18from excusing. 19MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, he is not saying you are welcoming 20it. He is saying you are making excuses for it. 21MR IRVING: And this is precisely the point that I have to 22challenge, my Lord, because, of course, what I am actually 23saying is there are explanations for these pogroms 24committed by the local population against the Jews, and 25that is not making excuses for them in any way at all. 26MR JUSTICE GRAY: I have already said, I understand the point

. P-34

1you are making and I understand the answer. 2MR IRVING: But it is a repugnant allegation to be made 3either ---- 4MR JUSTICE GRAY: There is no point in just using this point as 5a sort of punch bag and going on and on because I have the 6point. 7MR IRVING: Well, I am beginning to feel like a punch bag when 8I read this report with things being thrown at me the 9whole time like that, and I find that allegation 10particularly repugnant. I have described the atrocities 11committed by the Nazis against the Jews and by their 12collaborators against the Jews in very much detail in my 13works and never at any time have I given even the 14slightest hint of relish or welcoming these things. 15A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That is not what I am saying, Mr Irving. 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
I have repeatedly tried to argue away the Wannsee 17conference, you say at the foot of page 137. I am not 18going to dwell at length on that. If you are an 19historian, you would, no doubt, know that there is a great 20debate raging among genuine historians and scholars -- to 21spare you any difficulties here -- as to whether the 22Wannsee Conference was important or not. Do you agree 23with that? 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
There are arguments about how important it was, yes. 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes, so if somebody tries ---- 26A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not think anybody has said that it was unimportant.

. P-35

1It is a question of the level and degree of importance you 2attach to it. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
Do you agree that there is no reference to the word 4"liquidation" in the records or to any order by Hitler or 5to any systematic killing in the Wannsee Conference? 6A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, that is true. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
Middle of page 138, please. You say that I relied on 8Eichmann's testimony on other occasions but not when it 9does not suit me. This is another allegation of 10manipulation, right? 11A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
Can you tell me what other occasions I did rely on 13Eichmann's testimony? Are you just referring to the 14episode where he looks through the peep hole in the back 15of the van and saw the gas vans operating? 16A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think that is one of them, yes. There are others, 17I think, which I mentioned in the report. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
I relied on it when it suited me -- why would it suit me 19to use Eichmann's confirmation of something which I, as a 20denier, am supposed to be denying? 21A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, this comes back to the point that we talked about 22yesterday, that I made it clear that Holocaust deniers as 23a group have, on the whole, always admitted, as Faurisson 24said, there were some small scale, relatively small scale, 25killings on the Eastern Front of Jews, and that belongs to 26that.

. P-36

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
Have you ever read very much of Eichmann's testimony 2either in his memoirs or in the subsequent trial in 3Israel? 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I have read some, not the whole thing. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
Are you familiar with the passage where Eichmann, 6challenged about a particular episode, interrupted the 7interrogator two minutes later and said words to this 8effect: "I am sorry. You asked me two minutes ago about 9that episode, and I have to say now I cannot remember 10whether I am actually remembering it or just remembering 11being asked a question about it more recently"? 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, you would have to show me that document. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
Do you agree that sometimes this happens in 14interrogations, that the interrogator puts questions with 15such force that sometimes the person being interrogated 16comes to believe what is being suggested to him by the 17questions? 18A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, that is a very general statement, Mr Irving, and 19I suppose in some integrations somewhere or other that 20kind of thing takes place. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
Going on to page 139, the Commissart Order, and the 22guidelines for jurisdiction issued to the German Army and 23armed forces in the spring of 1941. I am not asking you 24in detail about them, but would you agree that these are 25documents of a military nature? 26A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am sorry, I cannot see this.

. P-37

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
139, paragraph 11. We are dealing here with the orders to 2kill Jews, Red Army Commissarts and others in the German 3Army area? 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Oh, yes, yes. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
So this is a reference to the Commissart order, is it not? 6A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
All I am trying to get from you is a concession that the 8Commissart order issued by the German High Command of the 9armed forces was a military document concerned with 10military measures and that it did not convey a clear and 11overriding intent to kill the Jews as such? 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It is, no, it is an order that Red Army Commissarts will 13be killed. There were orders issued to that effect in 14its -- I mean, it is very hard to describe that as a 15military order in the sense that it did not seem to me, or 16to most historians, there to be any military justification 17for it. It is a political act. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
The simple question there is were they being killed as 19Commissarts or as Jews? 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
As Commissarts. The Jews are a separate matter in these 21orders. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
And do you accept that at this time the Soviet Union was 23not a signatory of the Geneva Convention on 24prisoners-of-war and, therefore, the Germans had no 25obligation whatsoever to treat their prisoners properly? 26A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That is a rather different matter, Mr Irving, and actually

. P-38

1issuing an order to the Army to kill Red Army Commissarts 2is a very different matter from simply not treating people 3properly. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, you accept that when nations become belligerent, 5they have a choice that they can make, they can agree both 6sides, they can become signatories and parties of a 7convention like the Geneva Convention on treatments of 8prisoners-of-war, and the Soviet Union had specifically 9opted out of it and, therefore, at no time opted into it, 10so the Soviet Union, legally speaking, Soviet prisoners 11could not expect to be treated as prisoners-of-war and, in 12fact, nor could German prisoners be expected to be treated 13as prisoners-of-war? 14A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, if you are advancing that argument as an excuse or 15justification for the order to the Germany Army to kill 16all the Red Army Commissarts found and for the deliberate 17killing of between 3 and 4 million Soviet prisoners-of-war 18by the Germans, then I do not think it is a very strong 19justification or excuse. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
Did you hear me express it in those terms as an excuse? 21A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That seemed to me what you were saying. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
Was I not, in fact, just taking up the point you made 23before I mentioned the Geneva Conventions in which you 24referred to the illegal killing of these Commissarts? 25A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
You have lost me, I am afraid. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
In paragraph 12 you refer to Holocaust denier, Paul

. P-39

1Rassinier, and on the following page, the first line of 2page of 140, you refer to Austin App? 3A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
Why do you refer to these people? Is it not totally 5irrelevant to bring in all these names of people? 6A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No. I am suggesting here that these are familiar -- the 7arguments you are putting forward are familiar arguments 8from well-known Holocaust deniers, advanced by many other 9Holocaust deniers. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
Unless his Lordship disagrees, what possible relevance 11does that have to this case that other writers have 12strange views? 13MR JUSTICE GRAY: Very, very marginal, in my view, so we can 14move on. 15MR IRVING: In other words, I need not prepare to address it? 16MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, you do not. 17MR IRVING: We do, however, on this point come to the important 18matter of the allegation by me that the Holocaust story in 19part is an echo of our own propaganda. My Lord, I do 20think we have dealt with this allegation before, have we, 21in this court? 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: No. 23MR IRVING: It is quite an intricate allegation, and, witness, 24you disagree with this. Can we take it in stages? Do you 25agree that the Allies at any time started making 26propaganda broadcasts to Germany with references to the

. P-40

1extermination of the Jews? 2A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. I certainly agree with that. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
Can you put a rough date on when these broadcasts began? 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Sometime in 1942. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
Sometime in 1942? 6A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
As I recall. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
Have you read the memoirs -- do you know who Thomas Mann 8is? 9A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
Was he a famous German novelist? 11A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Indeed. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
Author of I think "Wooden Brooks" and various other ---- 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, that is right. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
--- famous novels? Where was he during World War II? 15A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
He was in the United States. 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
In the United States. Was he engaged by the Allies as a 17propagandist? 18A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That, I am not sure about, but he certainly did make 19broadcasts, yes. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
Have you read his memoirs and his own diary? 21A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
If I put to you either now or later passages from the 23Thomas Mann diary of 1941 in which he describes making 24broadcasts relating to -- here we are ---- 25MR JUSTICE GRAY: In a way, Mr Irving, you have got your answer 26because Professor Evans has agreed that there were

. P-41

1propaganda broadcasts from 1942 about the extermination of 2the Jews. 3MR IRVING: I was going to bring you back to 1941. It may seem 4completely immaterial, my Lord, but -- in January 1942 5Thomas Mann broadcast the following words in German: 6"[German - document not provided] "400 Young Dutch Jews 7have been brought to Germany to be used as experimental 8objects for poison gas in January 1942". Can you accept 9that if he writes that in his diary as a propaganda 10broadcast that he made that there was such a broadcast? 11A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, could I see a copy, please? 12MR JUSTICE GRAY: Do we need to take terribly long? This is 13actually 1942, not 1941, but you have got your answer that 14there was propaganda use being made of the alleged 15extermination of Jews. 16MR IRVING: Right. 17MR JUSTICE GRAY: From, at any rate, 1942. 18MR IRVING: Buttressed with three more sources but we will not 19go into detail, my Lord. Have you heard of the 20Ringlebloom diary. 21A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
Will you accept that Ringlebloom makes reference in June 231942 in the ghetto to receiving broadcasts about the 24extermination of Jews with poison gas? 25A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, I will accept that. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
If you have read my Goebbels biography, as no doubt you

. P-42

1have for the purposes of this case, will you agree that 2the German Propaganda Ministry monitored a wave of 3propaganda broadcast in November 1942 referring to the 4gassing, mass gassing, of Germans? 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
In other words, they were Nazi monitoring reports of the 7BBC. You yourself, Professor, are an expert because you 8have written a box on the subject, have you not, of German 9wartime morale, of the reports? I think you wrote a book, 10did you not, on the subject of reports on public opinion, 11morale? 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, no. I think the book you are thinking of covered the 13years 1892 to 1914. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
So this is the wrong war? In other words ---- 15A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It is not even the war at all. It is before the First 16World War, I am afraid. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
So you are not familiar with the SD reports or with the 18letter intercept reports or anything like that on German 19public knowledge? 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Slightly familiar, but I would not say that I was a major 21expert on them. I mean, I know what the SD reports were. 22I have read a few of them, but I am in no sense a real 23expert on them. 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes, you are absolutely right. I am wrong. Your book 25was [German] was it not? So you have not read any of the 26corresponding reports on German public morale, public

. P-43

1opinion, that were gathered by the Gestapo or by the 2Propaganda Ministry in the war years? 3A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Only those which were cited in publication of other 4scholars and one or two in the original, but I have not 5read them thoroughly. 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
How much talk was there in Germany during the war years of 7gas chambers, do you think, in public or in private? 8A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think that is very difficult to say. We have to 9remember that there was a great deal of secrecy 10surrounding them. I think there was a fair amount of talk 11about shootings behind the Eastern Front, but of course it 12was against the law, and punished severely, if you spread 13news about what was going on in concentration camps or 14extermination camps in Germany. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
Given that the BBC made -- I am going to keep this 16brief -- repeated broadcasts during 1942 about the Nazi 17atrocities, and about the extermination of Jews, and about 18gas chambers, even before the gas chambers began operating 19on a large scale ---- 20MR RAMPTON: Wait a minute. If Professor Evans is to deal with 21that, Mr Irving must give some precise dates. One 22remembers evidence is that the evidence is that Chelmno 23started killing people in gas trucks 8th December 1941, 24and that the three Reinhardt camps were in full operation 25during the summer 1942. I think we need some dates. 26MR IRVING: With respect, Mr Rampton, I think, in view of the

. P-44

1fact that Professor Evans has stated himself that he is 2not an expert on this matter ---- 3MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, Mr Irving, that will not do, will it? 4You cannot put a question which has as its premise a 5misstatement about the date when gas chambers began 6operating. That is the point that Mr Rampton is 7making. It does not impinge on that objection that 8Professor Evans may not himself be an expert. If you are 9going to ask that question, and it is a relevant question, 10you must premise it correctly. 11MR IRVING: I was really trying to save the court time. 12MR JUSTICE GRAY: That will not do either, Mr Irving, if I may 13say so. 14MR IRVING: It will certainly take time for me to look up the 15actual dates and references and I do not want to take up 16the court's time shuffling papers. 17MR JUSTICE GRAY: Can I reformulate it for you and try and 18help? Or would you rather do it yourself? Do it 19yourself. 20MR IRVING: Your Lordship is much better reformulating 21questions. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: No. I think I must not interfere too much. 23A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Can I say that what is at issue here are Mr Irving's 24statements that "the British Intelligence Service 25suggested a propaganda campaign against Germany on the 26basis of invented allegations of gas chambers", or another

. P-45

1quote at the top of page 141, "The story that the Germans 2are using gas chambers for the mass extermination of Jews 3is, so and so on forth, psychological warfare, etc, warned 4the cabinet this is a lie that we ourselves had 5invented." That is really what is at issue. 6MR JUSTICE GRAY: I follow that. 7MR IRVING: This is very helpful. In fact, the witness has 8been very helpful and this helps me to zero in on the 9particular matter. Witness, will you therefore go 10straightforward to page 148 of your report? You are 11quoting here from a clip of Foreign Office documents, are 12you not? 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
In the Public Record Office. They are well-known 15documents and I am going to rely on the final paragraph of 16page 148. Is this document dated August 27th 1943? 17A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, that is right. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
At this time does Mr Victor Cavendish-Bentinck, who I 19think later became Lord Portland, state, "I think that we 20weaken our case against the Germans by publicly giving 21credence to atrocity stories for which we have no 22evidence." Is that right? Does he write that? 23A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That is what he says, yes. 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
So at this time in August 1943 the British had no evidence 25of gas chambers, because that what is specifically being 26talk about in this document?

. P-46

1MR RAMPTON: The Professor must be allowed to read the 2preceding two paragraphs that he himself has set out in 3his report because that is to rip something right out of 4context. 5MR IRVING: I thought it would be helpful to go forward to 1943 6to see what we did not know. 7MR JUSTICE GRAY: Let us see what the context is for what 8Cavendish-Bentinck said. 9MR IRVING: As regards putting Poles to death in gas chambers, 10that is pretty plain, is it not here? Here is the Foreign 11Office saying we have no evidence for this, and yet back 12in 1942 they are making the propaganda broadcasts. 13MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, I am just trying to read it. Can 14you just pause for a second (Pause for reading). I am 15bound to say that I do think that, in fairness to 16Mr Irving, one of the things about which 17Cavendish-Bentinck is saying that there is no evidence 18available to the British at that stage is the putting to 19death of Poles in gas chambers. 20MR RAMPTON: Polish children, and the underline is in the 21original. It is not Professor Evans. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: I agree what is being talked of is killing 23Polish children, or selling them. But also, as a separate 24topic, it seems to me a fair reading of this suggests, the 25putting of Poles to death in gas chambers. 26MR RAMPTON: Yes. Nothing to do with Jews so far as I can

. P-41

1tell. 2MR IRVING: Are Jews Poles? Is there some distinction there, 3Mr Rampton? 4MR JUSTICE GRAY: Anyway, I see the point. We have now at any 5rate seen the whole document. 6MR IRVING: My Lord, now I see that I have your Lordship's ear, 7may I now ---- 8A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Could I just make a couple of points here? These 9documents emerged during the formulation of a joint 10British/American declaration on German crimes in Poland, 11which is released at the request of the Polish government 12in exile, so it is focusing on Poles. 13MR IRVING: Do you agree that the statement concerned is on the 14facing page 147, and that the sentence causing problem is 15the allegation on the authority of His Majesty the king 16that Poles are "now being put systematically to death in 17gas chambers", and the word "systematically" figures in 18that? 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. That is the first thing. The context of this is 20negotiations involving the Polish government in exile 21about German atrocities in Poland. The second point is 22that of course Cavendish-Bentinck's position is not 23necessarily to be accepted as a correct one. He was 24extremely sceptical, and indeed has been criticised by 25historians for his negative attitude towards reports. As 26he says, the Poles and, to a far greater extent, the Jews

. P-48

1tend to exaggerate German atrocities in order to stoke us 2up. 3MR IRVING: Are you saying that he was anti-semitic? 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Thirdly, and the really crucial point here is that this is 5not the same as saying that these stories about gas 6chambers have been invented, deliberately invented. What 7he says is: "As regards putting Poles to death in gas 8chambers I do not believe there is any evidence that this 9has been done." I am bound to say that is probably 10correct. He goes on to say: "There may have been stories 11to this effect and we have played them up in PWE rumours 12without believing that they had any foundation". 13MR IRVING: What is PWE? 14A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Political Warfare Executive. "At any rate", he says, 15"there is far less evidence than exists for the mass 16murder of Polish officers by the Russians at Katyn. On 17the other hand we do know that the Germans are out to 18destroy the Jews of any age unless they are fit for manual 19labour". So what he is saying is this. He is not saying 20we have deliberately cooked up these atrocity stories. He 21is saying we have received stories which we are using. 22That is quite a different matter from what say. You say 23they are invented by the PWE. Secondly, he is saying it 24is about Poles, and he is making a distinction, saying 25explicitly that the Germans are out to destroy the Jews of 26any age unless they are fit for manual labour. That is

. P-49

1really the context of the quote that you originally gave. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
Very interesting. Will you now tell the court who Victor 3Cavendish-Bentinck was? 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
He was a Foreign Office official, I think. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
He was Chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee, was 6he not? 7A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Right, yes. 8Q.
[Mr Irving]
Did he therefore have access to every single scrap of 9intelligence evidence that came into the British 10community's hands? 11A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I doubt very much whether he had that. He would have 12received more general reports, I imagine, but I am not an 13expert on British intelligence in the Second World War. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
As Chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee he 15received all the police decodes, all the other decodes, 16all the intercepts, all the agents reports, all the 17prisoner of war messages, is that not right? 18A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not know, to be quite honest. I am not an expert on 19British intelligence. That sounds an awful lot for one 20man to master by himself. As I said, I would imagine that 21he would have received summaries of some description. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
The fact remains that he states in August 1943, when 23requested to authorize a government statement signed by 24Churchill and Roosevelt, that Poles were being 25systematically put to death in gas chambers on the facing 26page. He specifically issues a minute to the Foreign

. P-50

1Office officials, saying, "We weaken our case by publicly 2giving credence to atrocity stories for which we have no 3evidence". He then goes on to say, "These mass executions 4in gas chambers", in other words the story of the mass 5executions in gas chambers, "remind me of the story of the 6employment of human corpses during the last war for the 7manufacture of fat, which was a grotesque lie and led to 8true stores of German enormities being brushed aside as 9mere propaganda". He is not pussy footing around with 10the way he is describing the state of British knowledge on 11gas chambers in August 1943, and yet you have accepted 12that during 1942 the BBC and the Americans repeatedly 13broadcast in German these stories of gas chambers, which 14must therefore have been invented. 15A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not think that last statement follows at all. 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
He says we have no evidence, so where else could it have 17come from? 18A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
He is talking about mass executions of Poles in gas 19chambers. He says: "We do know that the Germans are out 20to destroy the Jews of any rage unless they are fit for 21manual labour." I think this is a good example, which you 22have just quoted, of the scepticism which unfortunately 23was engendered by the belief in many Foreign Office and 24other officials that a lot of the atrocity stories in the 25First World War were mere inventions of allied propaganda. 26MR IRVING: My Lord, this now goes back to the reason for this,

. P-51

1which is page 141, where the allegation is that I said 2this with no justification. 3MR JUSTICE GRAY: You have to grapple at some stage, and 4I think you are inviting my comment, with this, that, 5whatever may have been the state of knowledge within 6British Intelligence in 1942 or even 1943, the Defendants 7say that you have been alleging that the Holocaust is an 8invention by British Intelligence after all that we now 9think we know about what went on in the concentration 10camps has come to light. I think that is really the 11thrust of their case. You have established, I think, if 12I may say so, Mr Irving, that propaganda use was made of 13alleged gassing in gas chambers at a time when the senior 14officials in British Intelligence had no evidence for it. 15But you have to grapple with the next stage of the 16Defendant's case on this and I am sure you are coming to 17it. 18MR IRVING: I appreciate, and this is not the time to do that, 19but I can only tackle each particular part of the 20allegations against me piecemeal. I think I have shot 21that one right out of the water, if I may put it like 22that, that the allegation was that I had no foundation for 23saying that the Political Warfare Executive started the 24gas chamber stories running long before we had any proof 25for it. 26MR JUSTICE GRAY: No. I think you are failing to understand

. P-52

1the Defendants' point. 2MR IRVING: I appreciate fully what your Lordship is saying. 3MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, please listen. What the Defendants say, 4and Mr Rampton will correct me if I have this wrong, is 5that you are saying that the whole Holocaust story is a 6lie invented by British Intelligence. You have, as it 7were, part of the way along your line of argument, but you 8have to grapple, as I say, with the fact that the 9Defendants are contending that you have been making the 10allegation that the whole thing is a lie invented by 11British Intelligence in the teeth, they say, of all the 12evidence that it was nothing of the kind. 13MR IRVING: The gas chamber lie, if I can put it like this, is 14the story that the Germans gassed to death millions of 15people in factories of death. I am going to deal with 16that in a separate manner. We dealt with it partly with 17the witness van Pelt and I shall deal with it also by 18submissions on documents, and with further questions, 19either through this witness or other witnesses. But I can 20only tackle each element of this piece by piece. It may 21well be that there are bits of the story that I cannot 22bridge, rather the same as there are bits of the story in 23this systematic nature of the killing that the defence 24cannot bridge. The convergence of evidence here is, if 25I can establish there were no factories of death and that 26there were no holes in that roof, to put it bluntly, and

. P-53

1if I can establish that PWE started the story of the gas 2chambers running in 1942, then I have got a substantial 3part of the way towards justifying what I claim, even if 4there are one or two bricks still left out of the wall, if 5I can put it like that. 6MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. 7MR IRVING: Moving to page 150 please -- we have now dealt 8with that, my Lord -- paragraph 21, witness, do you take 9exception to my suggestion that witnesses and survivors, 10by virtue of the ordeal they have been through, have been 11subjected to some kind of traumatic stress which would 12affect their powers of recollection? 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Let me see what I say here. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
It is the final sentences on that page, really. 15A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, where you are asking a question about how you judge 16the credibility of Holocaust survivors, and you say, 17"I say that psychiatrists should concern themselves with 18this matter some time. There are many cases of mass 19hysteria". So I do take exception to the view which you 20put there that all the recollections of Holocaust 21survivors are the outcome of mass hysteria. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
Have I had said all the recollections of Holocaust 23survivors or just a part of them? 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think that is the clear implication of that. 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
Are you aware, witness, that there is a body of medical 26expertise assembled over the last 50 years into precisely

. P-54

1these matters of the ordeals suffered by concentration 2camp and slave labour camp survivors, what they have been 3through, the undernourishment, the effect this has on the 4powers of the brain, the bad nutrition, the post traumatic 5stress and all the rest of it and there have been very 6many learned disquisitions into this? The sentence which 7you have quoted was not intended to be some kind of slur 8on the character of people, the fact that somebody has a 9psychiatric disorder is in no way to be interpreted in a 10derogatory manner. It is just an attempt to analyse why 11sometimes they say things that do not exactly fit in with 12what the documents show. 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think you are saying it is more than sometimes, 14Mr Irving. I am not familiar with the literature you 15refer to. 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
So, in analysing all the eyewitnesses and the sources that 17one is going to use in writing this kind of history, you 18cast aside the possibilities of medical problems or 19medical objections to relying too heavily on these 20sources? 21A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think you would have to look at each case in turn 22individually. 23Q.
[Mr Irving]
Are you familiar with the case of Benjamin Gilcormesky? 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am indeed, yes. 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
How you would assess his motivation, shall we say? 26Obviously he went through some kind of wartime ordeal?

. P-55

1A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Very difficult to say. The evidence seems to be that he 2did not in fact. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
That he did not? 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. As I understand from what I have read, this is 5someone who claimed in a book, or wrote a book, called 6I think "Fragments", a Swiss gentleman, which was 7purported to be a story of his incarceration as a child in 8various concentration camps, and subsequently he was 9revealed to be an imposter. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
He was totally spurious, was he not? 11A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
He was completely spurious. He was not in the 12concentration camps. Indeed, I think he was born after 13the war and brought up in Switzerland. He was not Jewish 14and was not a victim in any sense. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
He was a spurious survivor of the Holocaust? 16A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That is indeed correct, yes, as I understood it. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
He had a tattoo, did he? 18A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I have no idea. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
Did he maintain that he had been in Auschwitz? 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
He maintained all these things, I have already said that. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
He described all the grisly horrors that he had seen? 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, you have your answer. He made it 23all up. 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
What seems to have been the case is that he had read an 25enormous amount about the Holocaust, and somehow persuaded 26himself that he had gone through it. That is a very

. P-56

1unusual case and that is precisely why, of course, it has 2given rise to such widespread debate and such a number of 3essays, investigations, writings and so on. 4MR IRVING: Was not the reason why it attracted widespread 5attention the fact that he was awarded literary prizes for 6his work, and that he was then found out to be spurious? 7Was that not the reason for the widespread attention? 8A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It was widely praised when it came out, yes, and therefore 9the shock when it was discovered to be spurious was all 10the greater. 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
You think that he is the only such case, do you? 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
The only one of which I am aware. It is a rather unusual 13thing to do. I think one has to admit. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
But he made a lot of money out it, did he not? 15A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That I cannot say. 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, if he won major literary prizes for his book? 17MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, I am conscious we are still on 18page 152. We have about 600 pages to go. It is not a 19race, but we have to keep an eye on what matters and what 20does not. 21MR IRVING: I have said I will finish with the witness in two 22and a half days, my Lord. 23MR JUSTICE GRAY: I want you to take your time when we get to 24what matters. We have not started on what matters, in my 25view. 26MR IRVING: What matters is this witness's credibility, my

. P-57

1Lord, and your Lordship may or may not have formed 2opinions about that. On page 153, half way down, line 4 3of paragraph 26, you refer to the fact that I evade the 4question by pointing minor inaccuracies in details of 5these reports. Would you say that the inaccuracies that 6we have pointed to in the reports by Hoess and Gerstein 7and Verba and Bimko and Tauber were all minor? 8A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am referring here to a radio interview in June 1989. 9Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. But what you are saying is that I pointed to minor 10inaccuracies in the reports of people on whom the 11Holocaust historians rely, the eyewitnesses, and I am just 12challenging whether these inaccuracies are in fact so 13minor. Are they not sufficiently large, in fact, to 14disqualify any reasonable historian from wanting to rely 15on that source? 16A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, I do not think on the whole they are sufficiently 17large. One has to reach a balanced judgment, in dealing 18with testimony after the event, sometimes many years after 19the event, as to how reliable it is. Of course, that kind 20of testimony usually contains some inaccuracies. The fact 21is that one should not use that as a basis for a sweeping 22dismissal of all this testimony. 23 Of course, there is a larger point here, that 24you yourself rely quite heavily on the postwar testimony 25sometimes obtained in interviews which were conducted by 26yourself of members of Hitler's entourage, which you do

. P-58

1not approach in this critical way. You do not point to 2inaccuracies, and generally speaking accept it as the 3truth. So I think you have a double standard. You wholly 4dismiss all the evidence of postwar testimony from the 5victims of Naziism and you accept the postwar testimony of 6the perpetrators. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
I am not going to answer that point because this was not a 8question you were asked. Would you now go to paragraph 29 9please? You deal there with a French woman called 10Marie-Claude Vaillant Couturier. Did you read her 11testimony at Nuremberg? Did you form an impression of her 12credibility? 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. This is dealt with at some length on the basis of 14Professor van Pelt's report. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
What was her maiden name? 16A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I cannot recall that. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
Was she the daughter of Lucienne Vogal, who was one of 18Willi Muntzenberg's closest collaborators? 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I will accept that, if you say that. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
You know who Willi Muntzenberg was? 21A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
Was he one of the leading commentators and agents and 23propagandists in, first of all, Russia and then in France? 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Indeed, yes. 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
So she came from these propagandist circles -- is that a 26reasonable derivation?

. P-59

1A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No. I do not think, because you are a daughter of a 2propagandist, that makes you a propagandist. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
Did she then marry somebody called Paul Vaillant 4Couturier, who was the editor of Humanite? 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I will accept that that is the case. 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
Which is the Communist Party newspaper in France? 7A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Indeed. 8Q.
[Mr Irving]
When she was examined or cross-examined in Nuremberg by 9one of the defence counsel, Hans Marks, did he ask her 10whether she had any literary background or any training as 11a journalist? 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
You would have to present me with the documentation, I am 13afraid. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
What inference would you gather Mr Marks was trying to 15make from this question? 16A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I really cannot comment without actually seeing a 17transcript. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is there any proof that this woman was ever in Auschwitz 19at all? 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Her testimony. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
In other words, purely what she said? 22A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
There may be some other evidence, but I am not really an 23expert on Auschwitz. 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
I am not only going to ask one more question. In view of 25that fact that she testified that at the time she was in 26Auschwitz she obtained records showing that 700,000

. P-60

1Hungarian Jews had passed into the camp in 1944, when in 2fact that was the entire number of Hungarian Jews who 3existed, was she liable to have been testifying to 4something from her actual knowledge? 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Let me say the point at issue in this paragraph of my 6report, I should make clear, is that you rely, and I think 7the court has been through this already ---- 8MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, we have. 9A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
On the notes of Judge Biddle. 10MR IRVING: On the use I made of Judge Biddle's notes? 11A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
-- which you misinterpret in order to discredit this 12witness. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is it likely that Judge Biddle, being no fool, would also 14have seen through her on the basis of the 15cross-examination? 16MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, we are not going to go through 17that again. 18MR IRVING: Right. At page 155 we come to the Anne Frank 19diary. 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
Was the Anne Frank diary a diary or a novel or both? 22A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It was a diary. 23Q.
[Mr Irving]
It was a diary. Was it one diary or was it several 24diaries? 25A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That depends what you mean. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
In other words, did she write it and then did she rewrite

. P-61

1it and then did she rewrite it? 2A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
As I understand it, it is a diary that is written through. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
Will you accept that she wrote it, and then she rewrote 4it, and then she rewrote it as a novel shortly before she 5was kidnapped by the Nazis? 6A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
What is your criticism of my -- in fact, I am sorry, page 8156, line 2 of paragraph 31. You object to my calling the 9diary a novel, do you not? 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yet, if the final version of the diary, as has been 12determined by the experts in Holland, is described as a 13novel, then that description by me is not unjustified? 14A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
You would have to show me the document of the experts in 15Holland which describe it as a novel. 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
You object to the fact that I suggest that whole pages are 17written in ball point pen? 18A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 19MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, if you are relying, just let me 20say what I am going to say, on what you describe as the 21determination by experts in Holland that it is a novel, at 22some stage that will be something you ought really to put 23to Professor Evans. I cannot find it but I think he deals 24with Anne Frank and her diary as a substantive criticism. 25Am I wrong about that? 26A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Pages 156 to 7.

. P-62

1MR JUSTICE GRAY: I thought you came back to it. Perhaps not? 2A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No. 3MR IRVING: My Lord, clearly, the reason I am asking these 4questions is that I understand that I am going to be 5cross-examined on this. 6MR JUSTICE GRAY: Now is your chance. I suspect -- Mr Rampton 7will tell me if I am wrong -- that Professor Evans may be 8the right person for you to target your cross-examination 9on the Anne Frank diary. 10MR IRVING: That is precisely what I was waiting for. Every 11new subject I adumbrate I am frightened of being stopped. 12MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am trying to stop you when you are on 13irrelevances. It seems to me Ann Frank is perhaps 14relevant and therefore do not take that aspect too 15quickly. 16MR RAMPTON: It is. The allegation is made against Mr Irving 17that without any foundation whatsoever he has alleged that 18the Anne Frank diaries were a fake, or are a fake. What 19is more, he has since admitted that he was wrong about 20that. 21MR IRVING: Well, can we elucidate this matter in my 22cross-examination rather than your statements from the 23floor? 24MR RAMPTON: Certainly. 25MR IRVING: Witness, will you go to the bundle of documents 26bundle F, and look at one item there, which is page 86?

. P-63

1A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
Professor Evans, are you aware of the fact that the father 3of Ann Frank fought a number of libel actions against 4people who maintained that the diary was suspect? 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, I think he did. 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
I think three or four libel actions. Are you familiar 7from the discovery with the fact that I corresponded with 8the father of Anne Frank on a number of occasions? 9A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
He never of course sued me for libel, did he? Is that 11correct? 12MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is neither here nor there. 13MR IRVING: My Lord, in the allegations is the fact that we 14paid damages, or I paid damages to the father. 15MR JUSTICE GRAY: That may be relevant. 16MR IRVING: That is why I was trying to get this admission from 17the witness that the father never sued me for libel. 18MR JUSTICE GRAY: It is the other way round that may be 19relevant. If you paid damages because you had alleged 20that the diary was a fake, that, I would have thought, 21might be relevant. 22MR IRVING: If your Lordship had waited, there would have been 23two questions, with a follow up, but we have not had an to 24the first one yet. 25MR JUSTICE GRAY: Ask the question again. 26MR IRVING: Witness, are you aware of any libel action brought

. P-64

1by the father against me? 2MR RAMPTON: My Lord, I do not know---- 3MR JUSTICE GRAY: I cannot understand what the relevance of 4that is. 5MR RAMPTON: I do not make an allegation that the father sued 6Mr Irving for saying that the diaries were a fake. Maybe 7he could have done but, as far as I know, he did not and 8I have never said that he did. 9A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am trying to find the passage in my report which you are 10referring to here. 11MR IRVING: Can we have an answer to the question? 12MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, because the question, I have ruled, is 13irrelevant, Mr Irving. Can you please pay some attention 14to what view I rightly or wrongly am taking about some of 15your questions. Sorry, Professor Evans, you were about to 16say something? 17A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No. 18MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, press on. You were asking the 19witness about page 86. 20MR IRVING: Are you aware that, in the course of these libel 21actions, a German court ordered the father of Anne Frank 22to subject the diaries to chemical and forensic tests? 23Can I have an answer, Professor? 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
If you are telling me that, I will accept that that is the 25case, yes. They certainly were subjected to tests. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
Were the results of these tests leaked to the German

. P-65

1magazine Der Spiegel in 1980? 2A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I will accept your view that they were. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
Document No. 86 is a New York Post summary of what Der 4Spiegel has announced. Do you agree that this states that 5the finding is, on the second page, the result of the 6tests performed at the Bundescriminalamtlaboratories show 7that portions of the works, especially of the fourth 8volume, are written with ball point pen? 9A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That is what it says, but this is of course is third hand 10information. It is a reporter who is reporting another 11reporter's view of a report. I think, before accepting 12that this particular reporter is giving an accurate 13account, I would need to see the original report. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
I do not really want to get bogged down in this kind of 15maze. Can I just put it to you like this? Will you 16accept that, on the balance of probabilities, the 17Bundescriminalamt did carry out tests on the ink and came 18up with the surprising conclusion that portions were in 19fact ball point ink? 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It depends what you mean by "portions". I think that is 21the crucial point. My understanding, having read the 22summary of the forensic scientific investigations carried 23out on the diaries, in the introduction to the kind of 24official standard edition, scholarly edition, is that 25there were some small stylistic emendations in ball point 26pen, but that paper and ink and so on were all of the

. P-66

1diaries themselves were derived from the 1940s, i.e. 2before the end of the war. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
How long has this been your understanding? Did you have 4this understanding at the time you wrote your expert 5report? 6A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Let me just see. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
In other words, is this knowledge about portions of the 8diary being rewritten in ball point ink or whatever recent 9or some years ago? 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, I have looked -- my knowledge or whose knowledge? 11MR IRVING: Your knowledge we are talking about. 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
My knowledge. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
At the time you wrote this report. 14MR RAMPTON: Footnote 118. 15A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Thank you. Yes, The Critical Edition, 1989. 16MR IRVING: My question is, of course, if you were aware of the 17fact that these tests had been carried out and that there 18was this, shall we say, ambiguous finding? 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not think it is ambiguous at all, Mr Irving. 20MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, I wanted to ask about that. 21A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It is quite clear. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: Professor Evans, may I put this question to 23you because then we can get on? Would it be an unfair 24reading of the report that you have just been shown by 25Mr Irving that it, in fact, far from confirming that it is 26a forgery, confirms that it is authentic because it says

. P-67

1that there are some sections which were added 2subsequently, but by necessary inference is saying that 3most of it was genuine and already there and not in ball 4point? Not very articulately expressed, but do you agree 5with that proposition? 6A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, yes, and that is my understanding of the forensic 7investigations which were carried out both by the Federal 8German Criminal Office and by the Dutch Centre for War 9Documentation, that the diaries were genuine, but that 10there were some small stylistic emendations, certainly not 11whole pages or whole sections, let alone the whole thing 12being fake or a novel. 13MR IRVING: Have I ever said that the whole thing was written 14in ball point pen? 15A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
You said whole pages are written in ball point pen. 16MR JUSTICE GRAY: You said it was a novel, Mr Irving, did you 17not? 18MR IRVING: The third version is a novel, my Lord. The third 19version is a novel with the names changed. 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
You did say in the Daily Mirror on 27th November 1979: 21"Many forgeries are among records, including the diary of 22Anne Frank". "The Anne Frank" -- another occasion in 231986: "The Anne Frank diary of which you have all heard 24is partly written in ball point ink, parts of the Anne 25Frank diaries are written in ball point ink". 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
Are you aware of the fact that the father of Anne Frank in

. P-68

1one of the libel actions obtained an affidavit from a 2handwriting expert who testified that the entire diaries 3were written in the same handwriting of the same person, 4including, therefore, the ball point passages? 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, I am not aware of that. 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
Whether that is true or not, in other words, this 7allegation that the entire diaries, or this finding by the 8expert that the entire diaries were written in one 9handwriting, was it not reasonable for somebody to say in 101979, as I said in the passage you just quoted, that the 11diaries were suspect? 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That is not quite what you said, Mr Irving. You did not 13say they were suspect. You said they were fake. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
Let us take it stage by stage. 15MR JUSTICE GRAY: Let the witness answer first. You suggested 16that you were only saying that they were suspect. 17Professor Evans, do you think that Mr Irving went further? 18A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do, my Lord. He is saying they are a forgery. 19MR IRVING: Is that not a reasonable conclusion, if the father 20himself has produced evidence to the courts that the 21handwriting is the same the whole way through, 22graphological evidence by affidavit in one of these libel 23actions that the handwriting is the same and that the 24handwriting turns out to be partly in ball point ink? 25A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Mr Irving, you said in 1993 that the diaries were a novel, 26the handwriting was not hers, whole pages were written in

. P-69

1ball point pen, a 13 year old girl would not have the 2nouse to write a document of that sort at all ---- 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
Professor Evans, can you stick with chronology ---- 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
This is a long time after the ---- 5MR JUSTICE GRAY: Let the witness answer. 6A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
This is well after the official edition had been published 7in 1989. This is talking, what, four years after that. 8MR IRVING: Can we stick to the chronology, please? We are at 9present back in 1979 and 1980, right? 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, and in my report, Mr Irving, I cite what you say in 111989, in 1993. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
And it is very convenient to confuse the chronology, but 13if we sort things out ---- 14A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
There is not confusing about that chronology at all, 15Mr Irving. It is quite clear what you say in 1993; you 16assert that it is, that it is a fake. It is a forgery. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
Let us take this in stages. First of all, will you accept 18that the third edition written by the daughter of Otto 19Frank, Anne Frank, is written by her as a novel in which 20she has changed the names in her own diary into novel 21form? 22A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, the official edition published by the Dutch Centre for 23War Documentation is a diary. 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
Will you accept that the third eversion she has written is 25written as a novel with the names changed in novel form? 26A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I have to at this point confess I am not expertise -- I do

. P-70

1not have the expertise to go into that amount of detail. 2I have looked at the official edition and it is quite 3clear to me that that is a diary. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
So if it is a diary, why are the names changed then? 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
The official edition. 6MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, I can think of all sorts of reasons. 7At the moment I do not understand the significance of Anne 8Frank ---- 9MR IRVING: Well, because he is emphasising there ---- 10MR JUSTICE GRAY: Please let me finish. I do not understand 11the significance of it having been converted into a diary 12if it be the case that the original was a diary -- sorry, 13into a novel if it be the case that the original was a 14diary. 15MR IRVING: If your Lordship attaches no significance to the 16word "novel", then I will abandon that particular line. 17MR JUSTICE GRAY: My impression of the evidence so far is that 18you have dismissed Anne frank's alleged diary as being in 19its totality no more than a novel, i.e. a work of 20fiction. If I am wrong about that, no doubt you will 21disabuse me. 22MR IRVING: If your Lordship is going to attach importance to 23the word "novel", then perhaps we should look at precisely 24what the allegations are and the passages that are 25quoted. Can I just get the chronology straightened out 26because this is what the expert witness is, I think,

. P-71

1seeking to confuse. 2 There are two important thresholds to be crossed 3here. The first threshold that we cross is the 4investigation by the German Government laboratory in 1980, 5and the second threshold is the authoritative 6investigation by the Dutch authorities which was a few 7years ago. Now, the question is whether I heeded each of 8these authoritative enquiries or whether I disregarded 9them. 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
And the answer is that you disregarded them. 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, let us take it stage by stage. Before 1980, was 12I entitled to say that because the handwriting expertise 13said that the handwriting was the same the whole way 14through this opus and parts of it were in ball point ink, 15therefore, the whole opus was suspect. Was that a 16reasonable conclusion? 17A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, I do not think it was because the parts that were in 18ball point ink were only stylistic emendations. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
But if they were said by the father to be in the same 20handwriting the whole way through -- this is the point 21I am trying to make -- if he produced expert evidence that 22the handwriting was unchanged? 23A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, you would have to -- you would have to present me 24with the written evidence for the claims you are making. 25I find it very difficult to deal with it in the way that 26you are ----

. P-72

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, you have set yourself up here as an expert on this 2particular matter and now each time we come up with an 3important ---- 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Let me try to give the context of this again, I am trying 5to ---- 6MR JUSTICE GRAY: Page 156, the criticism you are making, 7Professor Evans, is of what Mr Irving said in 1993. 8A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 9Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
That is the criticism. 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Exactly. 11Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
There is no point, Mr Irving, in going back to 1980 12because it was in the late 80s, as I understand it, that 13the scientific evidence, so the Defendants say, emerged 14which established that these were authentic diaries. You 15went on after that to say that they were novels and that a 1613 year old could not have written such a document. 17MR IRVING: My Lord ---- 18MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is the point that is made against you. 19MR IRVING: What exactly is said in this 1993 passage? Your 20Lordship has it in front of you. It is the indented 21passage here: "Are you aware that they have made a full 22report? I say: "Doesn't surprise me". This is a very 23selective excerpt. If there was any specific reference by 24me in 1993 for saying that the diaries in their totality 25are a fake, believe me, this expert witness would, surely, 26have quoted it?

. P-73

1A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, let me quote 9th November 1993 broadcast. This is 2video tape 207, and it is in English in tape 213. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is this in your report? 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No. This is in my response to your written questions, so 5it is available. 6MR JUSTICE GRAY: Shall we try to find this? I would quite 7like to find it if we can. 8A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
My Lord. It is in my written response to Mr Irving's 9written questions. 10Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
No, I meant the original. Is it in one of the bundles? 111993? Where was the speech? Do you know? Was it in 12Australia? 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It is rather complicated, my Lord. It is a -- yes, it was 14in Australia. It is not clear whether it is Australian or 15American. It is a version of a Danish television 16programme which is also broadcast in German on German 17Television, but there should be a transcript of tape 213. 18MR RAMPTON: My Lord, if your Lordship has got, I do not know 19what it is called, Evans 2, is it, the file Evans 2? 20MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. 21MR RAMPTON: Behind tab 1 there are Professor Evans' responses 22to Mr Irving's written questions. On page 5 -- sorry, 23somebody has restamped it. Page 5 is the internal 24numbering of that document. At paragraph 9 your Lordship 25will see set out the history, as it were, for the 26genealogy of this extract in the report. There is a "7"

. P-74

1stamped at the bottom of the page. 2MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not know what you are looking at, but 3I am looking at, I think, something different. 4MR RAMPTON: Well, the document is dated 7th February 2000 and 5it should be in the front of Evans 2. 6A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
This is the second set of replies to Mr Irving's written 7questions. 8MR RAMPTON: Yes. 9MR JUSTICE GRAY: Have I got it? 10MR RAMPTON: You should have. It should look like that. 11MR JUSTICE GRAY: Sorry. Yes, I have. I beg your pardon. 12MR RAMPTON: In tab 1. 13MR JUSTICE GRAY: Page 5? 14MR RAMPTON: Page 5, paragraph 9. Page 5 at the top, paragraph 159, it runs over to page 6 is the history of this 16particular extract. 17MR JUSTICE GRAY: Have you got this, Mr Irving? 18MR IRVING: I do not want, but I wish to make some comments on 19this. Your Lordship will remember that on November 4th 20when we had the pretrial review, I expressed grave 21misgivings about the use of edited broadcast programmes 22with all the, I will not say the chicanery that has gone 23into it, but all the clever cross-cutting and, unless we 24see the transcript of the whole programme or, at any rate, 25very substantial excerpts which are clearly indicative 26that nothing has been put in or nothing has been cut out,

. P-75

1I would be very hesitant about allowing this kind of 2material which may be prejudicial to be put in in this 3form. 4MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, you say that, but if I read to you 5one of the extracts ---- 6MR IRVING: Yes, please do. 7MR JUSTICE GRAY: --- it is in these terms: "To me, the Anne 8Frank's diaries are a romantic novel, rather like 'Gone 9With the Wind' and I would not read something like that". 10MR IRVING: As a source, yes. 11MR JUSTICE GRAY: How can the context really affect what you 12are saying which is that it is all made up? 13MR IRVING: I am not saying that at all, my Lord. 14MR JUSTICE GRAY: Oh, I thought you were saying... 15MR IRVING: That is certainly not the point of what I am 16making. The Anne Frank diary, I am sure that your 17Lordship, like myself, has never had the pleasure of 18reading that particular work, but I have read a great deal 19about it, including the official Dutch investigation into 20it. I had lots of newspaper articles about it and I am 21quite familiar with its genesis; the way it started off 22first as a fragmentary diary, it was then rewritten by her 23in captivity because she had nothing else to do and then, 24as she grew up, she then rewrote it as a novel. 25 That is what I am saying there, but to take just 26that one sentence and to hang on that the imputation that

. P-76

1I am saying the whole thing is a pack of lies, which your 2Lordship just put on it, I think is a very adventurous 3forward step. 4MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, do we have the ---- 5MR RAMPTON: My Lord, I really do think this is becoming the 6most frightful waste of time. 7MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, at least it is relevant. 8MR RAMPTON: I know. 9MR JUSTICE GRAY: We have spent two days on the wholly 10peripheral matters. 11MR RAMPTON: I have been as patient as I possibly can be, but 12now I really cannot sit here any longer because I have in 13my hand a piece of paper taken from Mr Irving's website, 14or through his website, on 7th February of this month of 15an interview that he gave to something called CNN, which 16is a satellite news station, and he was interviewed on 1716th January. 18MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, I have that. I have read that. 19MR RAMPTON: This year. 20MR IRVING: Here we go again. It is another very heavily 21cross-cut and edited broadcast. 22MR RAMPTON: Well, I just read these four lines: "Interviewer 23to Irving: Did you say that the Anne Frank diary was a 24forgery? Irving: Guilty. Interviewer: Is it a 25forgery? Irving: No". 26MR IRVING: Absolutely right. Absolutely right. Before 1979

. P-77

1I was of the opinion that it was a highly suspect document 2for precisely the reasons I have set out, namely the 3father said the handwriting was the same the whole way 4through. He produced expert evidence in court to that 5effect in order to win a libel action. The handwriting 6was partly in ball point ink. So the conclusions there 7are absolutely plain. 8 After 1980 we had the German Government 9investigation which confirmed that the ball point ink was 10there and it was not until the Dutch carried out their 11authoritative tests that I was perfectly satisfied I had 12been wrong with that belief. I have made not the 13slightest hesitation in admitting that I was wrong, which 14is absolutely the right way to handle the matter. 15 But to take things out of chronology, which is 16what this witness has been doing, and to imply that by 17calling it a novel I am suggesting that the diary is in 18some way a pack of lies, is I think very unjust and not 19borne out by the evidence when it is presented in the 20proper sequence. But I repeat what I said about the 21prejudicial nature of producing fragments of very heavily 22edited sound bites from American or German or Danish 23television programmes. Your Lordship is familiar with how 24these programmes are concocted. The scissors play an 25important part. 26A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
My Lord, may I make three points?

. P-78

1MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. 2A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
The first is when you describe something, when one 3describes something, as a novel, one surely implies that 4it is fictional, it is not telling the truth. I do think 5that is a significant use of words. 6 Secondly, in my report on page 156 I quote an 7interview in 1993: "Interviewer: Are you aware that the 8Dutch Centre for War Documentation has made a full report 9about this?" that is to say the allegations of 10falsification and so on in the diaries. "Irving: Doesn't 11surprise me. Interviewer: And they say it's - they have 12made public all the diaries, and they examined the 13handwriting, and all there is to know about it. Irving: 14Doesn't surprise me. A lot of money is at stake. The 15Anne Frank Foundation is a very wealthy political 16organization in Amsterdam. Interview: We're talking 17about the Dutch State War Documentation Centre here. 18We're not talking about the Anne Frank Foundation. We're 19talking about a public institution. Irving: But I'm 20talking about the financial interests which are at stake 21here." 22 I think, Mr Irving, the clear implication of 23that is that the full report of the Dutch Centre for War 24Documentation is a falsification and is not reliable in 25any sense. 26 The third point I want to make ----

. P-79

1MR IRVING: Why have you not ---- 2MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, there are three points. 3A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
And If I can make my third point, is that again in 1993, 4his Lordship has already quoted part of this interview 5that you gave, saying that you would not read it, you read 6certain passages and so on. "We have samples of Anne 7Frank's real handwriting in postcards which she wrote to 8friends in 1940 and 1939. They were recently auctioned in 9an auction house in the United States about two years 10ago. That handwriting is totally different from the 11handwriting in the diaries. They are as different as 12chalk and cheese and the extraordinary finding is that 13some of the pages of the diaries have been written in ball 14point pen which is a pen that didn't exist in Anne Frank's 15lifetime". 1993, Mr Irving. 16MR IRVING: Yes, and, quite clearly, the parts that are written 17in ball point ink in the diaries cannot have been written 18by the girl who wrote the postcards, am I right? 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
You are saying some of the pages -- that simply is not the 20case. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
But some of the pages were written in ball point pen, is 22that correct? 23A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No. As I understand it, there were stylistic 24emendations. There are not whole pages written in ball 25point ---- 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
Do you have any evidence for the words "stylistic

. P-80

1emendations"? 2A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
--- pen. Well, this is -- yes, the report of the Dutch 3Centre for War Documentation which is summarized in their 4introduction to their Critical Edition which you dismiss 5as being the product of financial manipulation by the Anne 6Frank Foundation, whereas a few minutes ago, Mr Irving, 7you just said that you had accepted that report ---- 8MR IRVING: I do totally. 9A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
--- in 1989 when it came out ---- 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
And I did and I always have done. 11A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
--- and here you are in 1993 saying that you do not accept 12it. I cannot accept what you are saying there. 13MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, I think we have now had enough 14evidence on the Anne Frank diaries. I think we will move 15on to the next topic. 16MR IRVING: My Lord, he made now points. 17MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, I have got to introduce some 18control. We have spent this morning so far dealing with 19pages, I think you started at 128, is that right, and we 20have now got to 156. 21MR IRVING: If this expert report was not so flawed ---- 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: So we have spent nearly two hours dealing 23with very subsidiary points. We still have not got on to 24the guts of this report. 25MR IRVING: If this expert report was not so flawed and bias, 26then I would not have been bogged down in the marshes,

. P-81

1shall we say, before we came to the real materials. 2MR JUSTICE GRAY: I have made my ruling. You are going to have 3the opportunity to answer questions in cross-examination. 4We are moving on to the this next topic, and I am afraid I 5am going to have to be much more firm with you than I have 6been up until now. 7MR IRVING: If the witness could possibly answer more briefly, 8then we would not spent so much time on these matters. 9MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, that is not fair. 10MR IRVING: I advance with the utmost trepidation, my Lord, 11because I have no idea where ---- 12MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, advance and then see whether the 13trepidation was justified. 14MR IRVING: One never knows whether the mines are dummies or 15not. Page 158, the end of paragraph 34, you complain that 16I state that the witness Hoss made statements which 17contain egregious anachronisms, inconsistencies and other 18generally implausible passages. Do you not accept that 19that is so then? 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Let me -- where are we? Yes. Let me read the paragraph. 21We are talking about the memoirs of Rudolf Hoss, the 22Kommandant of Auschwitz, and the interrogations of Rudolf 23Hoss which were made in Polish captivity. In your book on 24Nuremberg you allege, I say, that Hoss was "manhandled" by 25those who arrested him and kept without sleep until he 26confessed. You term this "torture". You say: "Hoss's

. P-82

1confessions contain many deliberate errors to make it 2clear they were untrue. His memory is patchy about days 3and places, and about the events of four or five years 4earlier. There were many inconsistencies in his account. 5He signed a confession in English although he had no 6reading knowledge of English. He frequently changed his 7testimony about numbers. Hoss wrote his memoirs in Polish 8captivity 'as a means of postponing his fate'. His 9statements, Irving charges, contained 'egregious 10anachronisms, inconsistencies and other generally 11implausible passages". 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
Will you now answer the question? 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
So I am trying to summarize your views there. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
Do you dispute the fact that his statements contain these 15inaccuracies and implausible statements? 16A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not think there is -- well, first of all, I do not 17think there is any evidence that there are deliberate 18errors to make it clear that what he said was untrue. 19 Secondly, I think one has to distinguish between 20the interrogations and the memoirs. Hoss says in his 21memoirs that he was manhandled and very badly treated. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
Where did he write the memoirs? 23A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
He writes his memoirs in Polish captivity, and the 24confessions, well, the first of his confessions which, 25admissions, statements, which resulted from interrogations 26was, therefore, discounted. What I am referring to here

. P-83

1are the memoirs. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
I only have two questions to ask. Would a confession or a 3statement obtained by these means ever be accepted by a 4British court of law? 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I have already said, this is only one statement, the first 6statement. The memoirs that he wrote were certainly not 7obtained under duress. They were written in captivity 8under the imminent prospect of death and, to my mind, that 9makes them more likely to be honest. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
Would you answer the question? Would it be acceptable in 11a British court of law, this kind of statement? 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am trying to explain the context. The statement which 13he made under duress, the first of his statements, was not 14used. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
If he was such a reliable witness and so convincing, why 16was he not called by the prosecution at Nuremberg when he 17was actually in the building in a cell? 18MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is a question to which this witness 19cannot possibly know the answer. 20MR IRVING: On page 160 at line 4 of paragraph 36: "Irving 21casts doubt on almost all testimony at the Nuremberg War" 22-- is that an exaggeration, that I doubt almost all the 23testimony produced at Nuremberg? 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That is not what I say. 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, you say that I say it does not fit my arguments; 26I say it was obtained by torture and threats?

. P-84

1A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, no, I do not, Mr Irving. I say: "Irving casts doubt 2on almost all testimony at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials 3or during the prior interrogations if it does not fit his 4arguments, alleging it was obtained by torture and 5threats". Those are my precise words. 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
In other words, that I deliberately manipulate, I accept 7the evidence that I like and all the other evidence 8I disregard on this rather threadbare pretext of tortures 9and threats? 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
In your book on Nuremberg you refer constantly to -- and 11again, my Lord, this is in my written response No. 10 on 12page 6 of my reply to the second set of written questions 13by Mr Irving, where you talk about "the unsavoury methods 14of the OSS, intimidatory American tactics appear to have 15been routine, harassment of the prisoners, a paralysing 16regime of psychoterror enforced on the defendants", and so 17on. That seems to me to be general attempts to discredit 18the testimony at the Nuremberg War Crimes trials. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
Having you investigated the methods used by the Allies and 20the interrogators at Nuremberg? Are you able to state 21with confidence to this court that I am wrong? 22A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
You do not present, you present to me -- you present in 23your book some isolated incidents of maltreatment of 24prisoners of Streichier(?), I think, and, of course, in 25the initial interrogation of Hoss, but you do not present 26evidence in your book that this was general. I do not

. P-85

1really see evidence there to justify those statements 2which you make in a general sense. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
So you have complete confidence yourself, therefore, in 4the methods used by the allies to obtain ---- 5MR JUSTICE GRAY: No. This witness has said many times you 6have to look at all the circumstances and evaluate the 7particular witness and his evidence. 8MR IRVING: If you look at your footnote on that page, the 9second footnote: "Irving in an interview in New Zealand, 10recording a conversation with SS Colonel Gohler" which 11I claimed to have had at the end of the war when I would 12have been a child? 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, I look up the transcript. You said: "I remember 14right at the end of the war I asked one of Himmler's 15staff", and so on and so forth, but it is not a very 16important point. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
So why did you put it in then? 18MR JUSTICE GRAY: Let us move on we all. Agree it is not a 19very important point. 20MR IRVING: But you are implying there that I have lied again, 21are you not, in that footnote? 22A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, I am not, no. It is an amusing little mistake that 23you made. 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
You agree that it is a misreading, therefore, of a 25transcript? 26MR JUSTICE GRAY: Don't let us spend time on it, Mr Irving.

. P-86

1A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, I do not agree it is a misreading. I think it is just 2a misformulation of yours, Mr Irving. It is not very 3important at all. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
These verbatim transcripts can easily be misread? 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, I think I read it correctly. I am just saying it is a 6slip of your tongue, that is all. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
Or a slip of the punctuation of the person doing the ---- 8MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, will you please move on? 9MR IRVING: You are still critical, of course, of my methods of 10obtaining information from Hitler's private staff. Would 11you see, please, pages 83 to 5 of the little bundle? This 12is the complete passage from that interview you have just 13quoted, the one where I was allegedly conducting 14interviews as a six year old. Why did you not pay more 15attention to the surrounding three pages of that interview 16instead of this rather amusing little footnote you put in? 17Do I not describe in those three pages (and this is the 18question) how I have persuaded Hitler's private staff to 19reveal to me ugly secrets of their memories of their times 20with Hitler, if I can put it like that, and is that not 21more significant? 22A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, that is not the context here of what I am talking 23about here at all, Mr Irving. 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
Have you referred to these three pages anywhere in your 25expert report? 26A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
These are?

. P-87

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
The reference to what Hitler's private secretary told me 2about the Night of the Long Knives, for example? The 3reference to what Johannes Gohler told me about Hitler's 4order to Himmler to liquidate the inmates of Buchenwald? 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
The Night of the Long Knives is not a -- I think I do 6mention the Night of the Long Knives briefly, but it is 7not really a central point in my report. 8MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think you made this point on Thursday to 9this witness. 10MR IRVING: We did, my Lord, but I am just drawing attention to 11the fact that he uses the transcripts very selectively to 12imply that I am lying about the date I conducted an 13interview, but there are three pages ---- 14A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am sorry, Mr Irving, I did not. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
Will you please not interrupt? 16A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I did not imply that you were lying. I am quite happy to 17accept it is a slip of the tongue. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
But he ignores the three pages ---- 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It is not an important point. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
--- which show me quite clearly using interviews in the 21manner that they should be conducted. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, you made a perfectly sensible 23point on Thursday, namely that you often do refer, so you 24say, to the unfavourable things that the Adjutants and 25their relations told you about Hitler. You have made that 26point. I have absorbed it and I have digested it. There

. P-88

1is no point in going back over it all over again. 2MR IRVING: My remark goes purely to the selective nature of 3this expert witness's report and reporting on the basis of 4the evidence before him. 5MR JUSTICE GRAY: Would you like to move on now? 6MR IRVING: Page 162, when we are now dealing with Hans 7Aumeier, you allege that: "It did not fit into my 8preconceived notion" - this is three lines from the end 9- "it did not fit into my preconceived notion that there 10were no gassings" ---- 11A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is it not, in fact, the case that Hans Aumeier's reports 13are not eagerly seized upon by the Holocaust historians 14because he, too, presents information which does not fit 15in with the standard version, like the gassings times? 16A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think that, in fact, the Aumeier documents, which you 17discovered in the Public Record Office after their release 18in 1992, were not seen by anybody else. So I do not think 19there is any suppression there by other people. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes, but is it not the fact that the Aumeier documents do 21not fit in with preconceived notions in the way you 22suggest? 23MR JUSTICE GRAY: We went through all this with Professor van 24Pelt, did we not? 25MR IRVING: On page 163, now, paragraph 41, you ask: "Who 26could possibly have gone to all the immense trouble

. P-89

1necessary to fabricate such a vast quantity of documentary 2material"? What documentary materials were you describing 3there, just so we can be sure of what you are talking 4about? 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, a number of different things, the memoirs, for 6example, of Holocaust survivors which exist in substantial 7number. 8Q.
[Mr Irving]
You are not talking about wartime documents then? 9A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not say wartime documents. In addition, in the 10course of this trial, you have repeatedly alleged that 11wartime documents have been fabricated without really 12saying who would have done it or why, or what opportunity 13they might have had to do so. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
His Lordship knows this is not true. I cast suspicion 15only on one document. 16MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am afraid I do not accept that, Mr Irving. 17MR IRVING: On the June 24, 1943 document, my Lord. 18MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, you cast suspicion on a number of other 19documents. 20MR IRVING: I am impugning the integrity of only one document 21then. Let me put it like that. I raise my eyebrows at 22certain others, but accept them just for the purposes of 23argument. In other words, you are not there talking about 24a vast quantity of wartime documents then. You are 25talking about a vast quantity of postwar ---- 26A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am talking there in a general sense about the evidence

. P-90

1of all the crimes, for example the existence of gas 2chambers. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
But this is important. 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It refers right back to the previous three sections of 5this particular chapter in my report. 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
I am trying to narrow down here -- this is quite 7important. If his Lordship is led to believe by a 8careless statement of the witnesses that there is a vast 9body of wartime documents, this would be unfair, would it 10not, because you are not referring to wartime documents? 11You are referring to postwar documents? 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am referring to all kinds of documents. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
You are not referring to wartime documents? 14A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am referring to documents including wartime documents, 15the totality of the written evidence for the Holocaust 16which you deny. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
Are you saying there is a vast quantity of wartime 18documents? 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
What I am saying is that there is a vast quantity of 20documents and material for all aspects of the Holocaust. 21MR JUSTICE GRAY: I expect you would accept, Professor Evans, 22just to move on, the number of overtly incriminating 23documents, wartime documents, as regards gas chambers is 24actually pretty few and far between? 25A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Gas chambers, other things such as the systematic nature 26of the extermination, I am referring to the whole package

. P-91

1of evidence. 2MR IRVING: But I am trying to divide that package. 3A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Wartime, postwar, shootings, gassings, systematic nature 4and so on. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
Professor Evans, you accept that we cannot do things that 6way in this court. We have to divide things up into 7parcels and look at the Eastern Front, look at the 8systematic nature, and look at the gas chambers, and look 9at the documentary basis for each. As his Lordship has 10said, you do accept that the documentary basis for the 11gassings, the gas chambers and for the systematic nature 12of that is thin compared with the documentation of the 13Eastern Front shootings? 14A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, but what I am describing here is really -- I am 15moving on to the totality of all the different kinds of 16evidence. For example, I have dealt previously ---- 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
I am anxious you do not move on from the questions I am 18actually asking. 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Have dealt previously in the report in an earlier section 20with your allegation that Holocaust survivors have made it 21all up, for example. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
Can we have a clear answer ---- 23A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Stabbed their tattoos on their arms themselves and so on. 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
-- so that we can move on. The documentation relating to 25the gas chambers and the systematic nature of gas chamber 26killings is sparse compared with the documentation of the

. P-92

1killings on the Eastern Front, is that right? 2A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. I think that is correct, that I am referring here to 3the totality. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
Paragraph 44 on the facing page. You object to my 5suggestion that there was a well-financed campaign. 6A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I say it is a typical Holocaust denier's argument. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. If it is a true statement, is that an unjustified 8statement therefore? 9A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Let me quote the sentence. In the preface, this is a 10comment on a quote---- 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
Do not start reading all this out. 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am sorry, Mr Irving, but I do want to get quite straight 13what I am actually saying. I do not want the court to 14rely simply on your gloss on it. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
It is the question I am asking which you have to answer, 16I am afraid. 17A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, I am going to answer it. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
Do you agree that it is a well-financed campaign? 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am trying to -- can I just say what I say in the report, 20because that will make it much simpler to answer. In the 21preface to the English edition of the Leuchter report you 22wrote: "Nobody likes to be swindled, still less where 23considerable sums of money are involved". You go on to 24say: "Millions of honest, intelligent people have been 25duped by the well financed and brilliantly successful post 26war publicity campaign which followed on from the original

. P-93

1ingenuous plan of the British Psychological Warfare 2Executive (PWE) in 1942 to spread to the world the 3propaganda story that the Germans were using 'gas 4chambers' to kill millions of Jews other 'undesirables'." 5I go on to say then that this is the typical Holocaust 6denier's argument that the "myth" of the Holocaust has 7been kept going by a "well-financed" campaign in order to 8legitimize the paying of German reparations to the State 9of Israel. Quite clearly, I do not accept that everyone 10who has written about the gas chambers in Auschwitz and 11elsewhere, and the Holocaust, the extermination of the 12Jews, has been financed in order to legitimize the paying 13of German reparations to the State of Israel. I think 14that is an appalling slur on the large numbers of decent 15and serious scholars who have devoted a large amount of 16their lives to doing this. I think it is a disgraceful 17remark. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
I must insist that you answer my questions briefly because 19I ask the questions and then I am the one who gets into 20trouble when you answer at such length. 21A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, Mr Irving, but your question did not make it clear 22what I was saying in my report. I felt it necessary to 23say what I was saying. 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
Have you heard of the phrase "instrumentalization of the 25Holocaust"? 26A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I have certainly heard of that, yes.

. P-94

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
Can you answer in two or three lines what you understand 2by the phrase "instrumentalization of the Holocaust"? 3A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It is an accusation sometimes levelled at people who make 4a reference to the Holocaust and are accused of doing so 5for ulterior motives. 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is this the allegation that somebody like Norman 7Finkelstein makes? 8MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not really think that matters. 9MR IRVING: Page 168, paragraph 50, line 3, those three dots, 10you agree, stand for 58 words, five commas, two full stops 11and a colon, is that right? 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think we have already been through this. I do not think 13that is right, actually. 14MR JUSTICE GRAY: We are not going to count the full stops. 15Come on, Mr Irving. You have made your point about 16selective quotation. 17MR IRVING: Page 51: This goes to the anti-Semitism element, 18I suppose, does it not? 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Paragraph 51. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. I have made a speech in 1992 and you take exception 21to my description of the Board of Deputies, and the words 22that I use. Is any criticism of an organization like that 23permissible, do you think? 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do think it is rather over the top to describe the Board 25of Deputies of British Jews as cockroaches. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
If you are familiar with the methods that they have used

. P-95

1to try to destroy a professional historian's career and 2family, would that professional historian be entitled to 3use pretty colourful language to describe these people who 4are secretly trying to destroy him? 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That is a very hypothetical question. I think what you 6are saying there is that the Board of Deputies of British 7Jews have been engaged in a secret campaign to try and 8destroy your livelihood. 9Q.
[Mr Irving]
That is what I said. If the intention is to destroy an 10author and his family and his career and livelihood by 11underhand methods or by whatever methods, is he not 12entitled to defend himself and use occasional lurid 13language? 14A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I would have to first of all see evidence to persuade me 15that such a secret dastardly campaign had been carried 16out. I do not want to answer a hypothetical question of 17that nature. I do think that professional historians 18should be reasonably measured in their language. I do not 19think that is an appropriate word to use. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
If the court is shown a document showing that at this 21precise time that body was contemplating putting pressure 22on that author's publisher to stop publishing his books 23and thereby destroy his career and livelihood, and they 24were doing it behind armour plated doors in their 25headquarters ---- 26MR JUSTICE GRAY: Show the witness the document and then we can

. P-96

1see. 2MR IRVING: May I do so, my Lord? 3MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, of course. 4MR IRVING: Would you go to bundle E? 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am not sure I have this. 6MR JUSTICE GRAY: Bundle E. No, you may well not have. 7MR IRVING: I am looking for the document. Page 82 in the 8bundle called Global. 9A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
This is a meeting on 12th December 1991, Education and 10Academic Committee? 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
The Education and Academic Committee of the Holocaust 12Educational Trust. Can you read item No. 6 please? 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
"David Irving. Concern was voiced over the publication of 14the second edition of Hitler's War. There was debate over 15how to approach Macmillan publishers over Goebbels Diary. 16It was agreed await news from Jeremy Coleman before 17deciding what course of action to take". 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
I am not going to go into the remaining documents in that 19bundle, Professor Evans, but, if I put it to you that this 20is evidence and that other documents will be submitted to 21court later on, the pressure that was put on my publishers 22by this body, which is part of the Board of Deputies, 23which was meeting at their headquarters, am I not entitled 24to use that kind of language to describe these people? 25A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, to be quite honest, no. This is a meeting of five 26people, Mr Coleman, Professor Gould, Professor Polonski,

. P-97

1Mr Nyman and Dr John Fox. It is not a meeting of the 2Board of Deputies of British Jews. Where it takes place 3I think is pretty immaterial. It says that there is a 4debate, but they agreed that they are not going to do 5anything. So I do not think that is justification for 6calling the Board of Deputies of British Jews cockroaches. 7MR RAMPTON: What is more, there is another thing needs to be 8pointed out. That document, which is the first time I 9have seen, is dated 12th December 1991. It is predated 10therefore by some months by what Mr Irving said, which 11apparently was said on 5th October 1991. 12MR IRVING: Are you ---- 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It post dates it? 14MR RAMPTON: Yes. The document post dates the Irving statement 15about cockroaches. 16A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
You said predates. 17MR RAMPTON: I am sorry. 18MR IRVING: I do not want to hold up the court at this point, 19but will you accept that that bundle you are holding 20called Global is about three inches thick, and contains 21many hundreds of documents? 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is not a terribly illuminating question. 23MR IRVING: My Lord I do not really want to read through all 24the other documents. 25A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It is not a very contentious statement. 26MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, I am not asking you to. Anyway, I think

. P-98

1we will move on. You have put that document. 2MR IRVING: Precisely. Witness, will you accept that, on the 3balance of probabilities, there are other documents of 4that nature in that bundle? 5MR JUSTICE GRAY: If I may say so, Mr Irving, we must do better 6than that. 7MR IRVING: Mr Rampton has suggested that this was it, and so 8what. 9MR JUSTICE GRAY: What it comes to is, if there was in 10existence a document prior to what you said about the 11British Board of Deputies being cockroaches, which you say 12justifies you having said that, then put it to the 13witness. If you have not got such a document, move on, 14please. 15MR IRVING: I shall put it to the court in due course, my Lord, 16the whole bundle, as your Lordship is familiar. If an 17author is aware that such a campaign is being conducted 18against him by a body of whatever class or colour or race 19or religion, is he entitled to use lurid language in 20private? 21MR JUSTICE GRAY: You have asked that question many times 22before and that is a comment. You have not established 23the factual premise for it, so can you move to the next 24topic, which means going beyond page 168. 25MR IRVING: My Lord, you say I have not established a factual 26premise. To do that I would have to go back to the bundle

. P-99

1and I do not want to do that at this point. 2MR JUSTICE GRAY: In that case you cannot ask the question. 3MR IRVING: The final five lines of that same paragraph: "In 4April 1998 Mr Irving spoke of American Jews 'moving into 5the same positions of predominance and influence'", and so 6on, that they held in the Weimar Republic. This is a 7quotation, is it not, from my diary in April 1998? 8A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
From your website. Published on your website. 9Q.
[Mr Irving]
It is a quotation from my diary in 1998? 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Published on your website. In other words, it is free to 11anybody to access, which is what we did. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
Have you had access to all my private diaries? 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I did not need access to your private diaries to get hold 14of this quotation. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
Will you answer the question? 16A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
May I read the whole quotation first to establish what we 17are talking about? 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
Just answer that question. Have you had access to my 19diaries? 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am sorry, I want to read the whole quotation to get 21clear what we are going to see, then I will answer your 22question. 23Q.
[Mr Irving]
Will you answer the question first? 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
In April 1998 he spoke of American Jews'moving into the 25same positions of predominance and influence..." 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
My Lord, will you instruct the witness to answer questions

. P-100

1put to him? 2MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am despairing. Would you let the witness 3-- and then you can ask the question. Read it out 4please. 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
"In April 1998 he spoke of American Jews 'moving into the 6same positions of predominance and influence (media, 7banking, business, entertainment, and the more 8lucrative professions like law, medical and dentistry) 9that they held in Weimar Germany, which gave rise to the 10hatreds and the resulting pogroms; and that this being so, 11twenty or thirty more years might see in the USA the same 12dire consequences as happened in Nazi Germany". Extract 13from Irving's personal diary April 13, 14th 1998, on 14Irving's Focal Point website. The answer to your question 15is yes, I have had access to your personal diaries. 16MR IRVING: Do you have any reason to suspect this is not a 17genuine diary, what is on my website? 18A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think it is as genuine as the Anne Frank diary, yes. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
I will repeat the question. Do you have any reason to 20believe that this is not a genuine diary extract? 21MR JUSTICE GRAY: The answer is no. 22A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
The answer is no. I answered it. 23MR IRVING: Will you go to page 88 of the bundle which is F? 24My Lord, the purpose of this is purely to point out, not 25words left out but surrounding material left out. 26MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, context.

. P-101

1MR IRVING: Is this the diary as reproduced on my website? 2A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It looks like it, yes. I have downloaded on 15th February 32000. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
So it is a description of a lecture that I delivered to 5students at the University of Washington State in Pulman 6in 1998? 7A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, seems to be. 8Q.
[Mr Irving]
The questions are the best part as usual, a German girl 9student a quiet well spoken 20 year old, the Federal 10Republic's equivalent of a Rhodes scholar. I carry on now 11to the next paragraph. The paragraph begins: Several 12coloured students are there mostly training to become 13teachers. 14MR JUSTICE GRAY: This has nothing to do with the context of 15what Professor Evans quoted. It is completely irrelevant. 16MR IRVING: They are bright and friendly. 17MR JUSTICE GRAY: I have read it all. The context? This adds 18nothing and subtracts nothing. What is the point, 19Mr Irving? Why are we looking at this? 20MR IRVING: I am putting this in connection with the allegation 21of racism. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: What, about several coloured students being 23present? 24MR IRVING: "Several coloured students were there, mostly 25training to become teachers. They are bright and 26friendly".

. P-102

1MR JUSTICE GRAY: I see. I thought we were looking at this for 2context of what Professor Evans quoted. 3MR IRVING: I used the eye witness testimony of General Walter 4Bruns, which your Lordship is familiar with. I read out 5the whole of that document to these students, which goes 6to the Holocaust denial issue. This is a typical speech 7by me to university students who are a bright and friendly 8lot, and we have had just this one passage taken out of 9context when a Jewish Professor from the floor asked 10questions and I put to him my take on the present 11situation in the United States. 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, I do think that that is completely irrelevant. If 13you want a little bit more, the context is: "One 14questioner addresses the issue that I had raised in 15discussing the Daniel Goldhagen thesis, that if I were a 16Jew I would want to see an answer to the vital question 17why the Jews are so hated within only a few years of their 18arrival in each host country. He points out that the Jews 19have now been in the United States in strength for 50 20years yet they are not hated. I reply that, on the 21contrary, my own perception is that they are moving into 22the same positions", and so on and so forth. That is the 23context. 24MR IRVING: That is the context, my Lord, and I think that that 25substantially softens what might be taken to be the sting 26of that passage left, as it is, in that rather bald and

. P-103

1exposed position in the paragraph as quoted in the expert 2report. I am being asked by a Jewish Professor for my 3take on the present situation and I am telling him in this 4semi-academic atmosphere the worries that I would have if 5I were Jewish. 6A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, to my mind, it does not actually soften it at all. 7There is no indication here that it is a Jewish Professor, 8incidentally. What he says is, he quotes you, saying 9that, if you were a Jew, you would want to see am answer 10to the vital question why are the Jews so hated within 11only a few years of their arrival in each host country. I 12think I have done you a favour by leaving that out. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
On page 170, this is a sentence beginning with the 14word "fundamentally". Here you have allowed yourself to 15say, "Fundamentally, however, as Irving conceded", there 16is that word again "conceded", "he was in basic agreement 17with Goebbels in his belief that 'they had it coming to 18them'". Who do you mean by "they"? 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
The Jews. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
The Jews. So you are saying once again that I am 21applauding the Holocaust effectively? 22A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not think I use the word "applaud". There again, let 23me just read the surrounding context which you are so keen 24on reading out in your own statements, so I hope I am 25allowed to do the same with mine. 26MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes.

. P-104

1A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
In 1996 you recount the view of the publisher who 2eventually refused to publish the American edition of your 3book on Goebbels and you said: Maybe ... the chairman of 4St Martin's Press was right when he said: 'This book 5suggests they (the Jews) had it coming to them'. But if 6he is right, let me say in advance in my self-defence, it 7is not David Irving who says that, it is David Irving 8reporting Dr Goebbels who says that. Maybe I did not make 9it plain enough, or maybe I did not put enough distance 10between myself and Dr Goebbels or maybe I did not put in 11all the counter-arguments I should have done to be 12politically correct". "Fundamentally, however, as Irving 13conceded", I go on, "he was in basic agreement with 14Goebbels in his belief that 'they had it coming to them'." 15"For, Irving told an audience in Tampa, Florida, on 6th 16October 1995:", and then I have a very lengthy quote which 17I think has already been referred to in the trial, so I 18will not read it out. 19MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, it has. The short answer is that the 20Jews did have it coming to them, but there is a longer 21answer. I think that is a fair summary. 22MR IRVING: My Lord, what he has left out from this quotation 23of course -- we have not actually looked at it in detail. 24MR JUSTICE GRAY: We have looked at the Tampa, Florida one in 25detail. 26MR IRVING: The reference is to this violent demonstration that

. P-105

1began in one of my speeches in Freeport in Louisiana? 2Have we had that? The fact that the local community came 3along and violently disrupted a lecture that I was 4speaking at, and that that is what has been left out of 5the middle of this speech, in the middle of this 6anecdote? I am sure that we have not had that, my Lord. 7MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am sorry, I have lost you temporarily. You 8are talking about Louisiana but this is Florida. 9A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
There is an ellipse in the indented quotation. 10MR IRVING: There are four ellipses on that page, each of which 11was serious material and should not have been left out 12because it explains the remarks that follow. 13MR JUSTICE GRAY: Shall we deal with that as a matter of 14submission? We have been through this speech in 15considerable detail already. I have it reasonably well in 16mind and I do not think it is going to be sensible to 17spend ten minutes filling in the ellipses. 18A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I have looked at this speech again, my Lord, and the only 19passage that I considered should be reinstated is listed 20in my letter of 10th January 2000 with amendments to the 21report. So there is a short passage there. But otherwise 22I come back to the fact that this is a very long quotation 23already, and I think it gives a correct impression of your 24views. 25MR IRVING: In that case, let us spend the remaining few 26minutes before the adjournment examining precisely what

. P-106

1you consider my views to be, unless his Lordship 2disagrees. 3MR JUSTICE GRAY: No. 4MR IRVING: "Irving conceded that he was in basic agreement 5with Goebbels in his belief that the Jews had it coming to 6them". That is, of course, a repugnant statement and you 7are prepared now to defend that, are you, Professor? 8A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 9Q.
[Mr Irving]
So you are saying that Irving said that the Jews deserved 10the Holocaust? 11A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That is right. That is to say, of course, on your 12interpretation of the Holocaust. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
They deserved the gas chambers, the barbed wire, the 14millions of deaths, that they had it coming to them, and 15that this my own personal view? This is your view as an 16expert witness in this case? 17A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, I would not say the gas chambers, since you denied 18that in 1996 when you made this statement, but for the 19rest. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
Ignoring the cheap laughs. 21A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am sorry, I have to make that point. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
This is a repugnant allegation for you to make and you 23should not be playing to the gallery with cheap laughs. 24MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not think Professor Evans is playing to 25the gallery. I really do not. 26MR IRVING: If he says I do not mean the gas chambers because

. P-107

1of course---- 2MR JUSTICE GRAY: He is making the serious point that, when 3you, as he argues, say that the Jews had it coming to 4them, you cannot have been meaning that they had the gas 5chambers coming to them, because at that stage you were 6saying that there were not any gas chambers. That is the 7point. It is a serious point. 8MR IRVING: My Lord, this is characteristic of this witness's 9methods, that, when he come up against an awkward 10question, he attempts to push this particular express 11train on to a siding, and I am not going down the gas 12chamber siding, I am not going down that particular road. 13I am going to nail this witness down on his submission to 14this court that I applaud the Holocaust, which is what 15that sentence boils down to. 16MR JUSTICE GRAY: No. That is not quite what he is saying. 17What he is saying is that you had whatever you meant by 18the Holocaust, that the Jews had whatever you meant by the 19Holocaust coming to them. That is what he is saying you 20said. 21MR IRVING: With respect my Lord, is that not precisely what 22I just said? 23MR JUSTICE GRAY: Carry on with your questions and we will see 24where you get. 25MR IRVING: "Irving said that he agreed with Goebbels that they 26had it coming to them".

. P-108

1A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
Do you not see the distinction between an author writing 3in a book saying Goebbels said that the Jews had it coming 4to them and he believed they had it coming to them, and 5the author himself believing the Jews had it coming to 6them? 7A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I just quoted a lengthy passage where you try and wriggle 8out of the suggestion made by the chairman of St Martin's 9Press that the book suggests that the Jews had it coming 10to them. The man who was going to publish your book and 11had read it took that message from the book and you say 12that maybe you did not make it plain enough, did not put 13enough distance between yourself and Goebbels. I then go 14on to quote your speech in Tampa, Florida on 6th October 151995, where you say precisely the same thing. 16MR RAMPTON: Perhaps one could turn over the page for 17completeness because this theme is completed in paragraph 1856, and I do resist a lack of context. 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
In 1991 you said "they (and you mean the Jews) dragged us 20into two world wars and now, for equally mysterious 21reasons, they are trying to drag us into the Balkans". 22MR IRVING: Can we narrow down---- 23A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
There is another lengthy quote there, why does it always 24happen to the Jews, you ask. 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
Can we therefore narrow down what your allegation against 26the author of this book is? Are you alleging that he

. P-109

1applauded what happened to the Jews? 2A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
What I am saying here is ---- 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
It should be easy to answer. Does he applaud it or does 4he not, in your view? 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Let us read the text of my report, Mr Irving. 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
Can you just answer a simple question? 7A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
"Fundamentally, however, as Irving conceded, he was in 8basic agreement with Goebbels in his belief that 'they had 9it coming to them'". 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
Will you now answer my question? 11A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That is what I am saying. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
Will you answer my question? 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
The word "applause" and "applauded" does not occur there. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
Just so that everybody in this courtroom can be plain what 15you are suggesting, are you suggesting that I, David 16Irving, applauded what happened to the Jews or not? 17A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am saying that you are saying that they deserved what 18they got. 19MR JUSTICE GRAY: That answer has been given now three or four 20times, Mr Irving. 21MR IRVING: There is a certain amount of wriggling going on 22here. 23MR JUSTICE GRAY: If you say you never said anything of the 24kind, put that to the witness. 25MR IRVING: If what? 26MR JUSTICE GRAY: If you say you never said that the Jews had

. P-110

1it coming to them, or they deserved what happened to them, 2put that to the witness. 3MR IRVING: I am trying to get the witness to state 4specifically whether he sees a distinction between 5Dr Goebbels saying in his diaries, as quoted by me in my 6book, that the Jews had it coming to them on the one hand, 7and David Irving applauded what happened, the Holocaust, 8on the other. 9MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is a false antithesis because applauding 10does not come into it. No-one is suggesting you applauded 11it. 12MR IRVING: Thank you very much. If the witness would say the 13same ---- 14MR JUSTICE GRAY: Will you listen, please. What is being 15suggested is that you have on occasions said that the Jews 16brought it on themselves. Now, if you say that is not 17true, put it to the witness, and he will probably go to 18paragraph 56 of his report in his answer. 19MR IRVING: Can we take this in two stages? Witness, you have 20heard his Lordship say nobody says that David Irving 21applauded the Holocaust. Does that include you? 22A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I have already pointed out several times I do not say in 23these paragraphs that you applaud the Holocaust however 24you conceive of it. 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
What you do say is that I state in my Goebbels biography 26that Goebbels believed that the Jews had it coming to

. P-111

1them. That is the first question. Goebbels believed they 2had it coming to them? 3A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
And that in the following page to which Mr Rampton has 5drawn attention I go on then to examine that piece by 6piece and say to what degree was Goebbels right. Is that 7effectively right? 8A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No. 9Q.
[Mr Irving]
For example -- I do not want to go over old ground -- 10the Baltic States and so on? 11A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Let us leave the Baltic States out of it. What you say is 12that "maybe the chairman of St Martin's Press was right 13when he said this book suggests they (the Jews) had it 14coming to them, maybe I did not make it plain enough and 15maybe I did not put enough distance between myself and Dr 16Goebbels, or maybe I did not put in all the 17arguments, counter arguments, I should have done to be 18politically correct". One notes that sneering phrase at 19the end there. 20 Then you go on in paragraph 55 to recount what 21you said in a meeting. "I said", quoting you, "to a 22leader of the Jewish community in Freeport Louisiana, you 23are disliked, you people. You have been disliked for three 24thousand years. You have been disliked so much that you 25have been hounded from country to country, from pogrom to 26purge, from purge back to pogrom, and yet you never asked

. P-112

1yourselves what is it that the rest of humanity does not 2like about the Jewish people, to such an extent" ---- 3MR IRVING: Witness, we have had all this so many times My 4Lord, if he is going to read these parts, he must read the 5other parts as well. 6A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
"that they repeatedly put us through the grinder?" -- 7I know you do not want this read out, Mr Irving, but I am 8going to read it out. 9MR IRVING: I want all of it read out and not just your 10selection. 11MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, will you be quiet. The witness is 12trying to answer your question. 13MR IRVING: He is not. He is just wasting time. 14A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
"And he went berserk", you go on, this Jewish man. "He 15said: 'Are you trying to say that we are responsible for 16Auschwitz? Ourselves?' And I said, 'Well, the short 17answer is yes'". 18MR IRVING: "The short answer is yes". And? 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
"The short answer I have to say is yes. If you had 20behaved differently over the intervening 3,000 years" ---- 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
But you have left out bits, have you not, the whole way 22through that? You left out four passages from that? 23MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, we have been through all this 24before. We are going to resume at five past two and 25I hope you will move on. 26MR IRVING: With respect, my Lord, he should not have been

. P-113

1allowed to read out the truncated version again. 2MR JUSTICE GRAY: Five past two. 3(The Luncheon Adjournment) 4(2.05 p.m.) 5Professor Evans, recalled. 6Cross-Examined by Mr Irving, continued. 7MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, Mr Irving? 8MR IRVING: My Lord, I anticipate that in the rest of this 9afternoon we will get through as far as the 10Reichskristallnacht and well into it, in fact. 11MR JUSTICE GRAY: Good. 12MR IRVING: That is certainly my aim. In other words, we will 13definitely manage that. 14MR JUSTICE GRAY: Good. 15MR IRVING (To the witness): Professor Evans, on page 171 you 16quoted this passage. I am not going back to that 17passage. I have one problem with that quotation you gave 18us in paragraph 56 -- you provided no source for it? 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, that is oversight on my part. The source is given on 20page 7 of my answers to your written questions, your 21questions of 2nd January. That is video tape 225, 22interview in Key West, Florida, 1996, just 33 minutes into 23the interview. 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
Tape 225? 25MR JUSTICE GRAY: Have we got that? 26MR RAMPTON: I am sorry, which one is it? I am lost.

. P-114

1MR JUSTICE GRAY: Tape 225, Key West 1996. Do you want us to 2look at it, Mr Irving, for context or not? 3MR IRVING: I will not delay the court. Obviously, I wanted to 4see what the context was of that and see if there had been 5any omissions. Professor, when you make omissions from a 6document, do you always indicate it by ellipses? 7A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, of course. You will find one there, in fact. 8Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes, it would be very sloppy not to indicate the omission, 9would it not? 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It would be a mistake, yes. 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
And if I were to do that, of course, you would rightly 12criticise me? 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That would depend on the circumstances. It could either 14be just an oversight, a misprint, or it could be 15deliberate falsification, depending on the circumstances. 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
I am anxious to try to shorten your answers. I know that 17the Welsh are famous for their loquacity, and I hope that 18this will not be taken by Mr Rampton as yet another 19example of my racist predilections when I say that, but 20your answers sometimes do tend to run overboard and his 21Lordship has given me little assistance in this matter. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, well, I think that is the sort of thing 23you have to leave to me, Mr Irving. 24MR IRVING: I am an unskilled cross-examiner, as your Lordship 25is aware, and if you feel that the witness is overrunning 26his time, I would be grateful if your Lordship would be

. P-115

1bring it to the witness's attention. 2MR JUSTICE GRAY: Of course I will. That is one of my jobs and 3it has not happened yet though. 4MR IRVING: I say that because we are now going to come to 5Madagascar briefly at paragraph 57 on page 172. Can 6briefly say, in your view, whether the Madagascar plan was 7not a feasible option when the Nazis talked of the 8Madagascar plan, whether it was a pipe dream or it was a 9realistic project. 10MR RAMPTON: Sorry, can I just interrupt? Before we move to 11Madagascar, my Lord, the reference is, in fact, in K4, tab 128. It is an interview called Cover Story on 4th March 131997, in fact -- that is the date of the programme. It is 14an Australian television company, and the relevant passage 15is at page 7 of that transcript. 16MR JUSTICE GRAY: Thank you very much. 17MR IRVING: Was Madagascar ---- 18MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am sorry, can you pause again? I have a 19slight problem with my screen. 20MR RAMPTON: K4, tab 8, page 7. 21MR IRVING: In that case, before we come to Madagascar, in view 22of the fact it was an Australian company I was talking to, 23can I ask you one question? Witness, what is the time 24difference between Florida and Australia, approximately? 25Is it about 12 hours? 26A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I have no idea actually. I imagine, probably, yes.

. P-116

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
So if an Australian radio station is conducting a live 2interview in the day time, in fact, you are being 3telephoned in the middle of the night? 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
If it is a live interview. 5MR RAMPTON: No, I am afraid again we have gone way off course 6somewhere around the end of the world. This is an 7Australian film crew travelling with Mr Irving in America 8and doing the interview when they are there. 9MR IRVING: Right. In other words, this is another of the 10edited broadcasts which I shall have to pay attention to. 11MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, if you want to make a point that 12the context affects what you said about the Jews bringing 13it on themselves, then, by all means, go to the full 14transcript. You have been told where it is. But if you 15do not make that kind of point, then I think we really 16ought to get on to Madagascar. 17MR IRVING: There would be a better time to do it, my Lord, in 18view of the fact that your Lordship is anxious to make 19progress. If I were to look at that transcript now, I 20would have to be provided with a bundle, look it up, sit 21down and read it and we would lose at least 10 minutes. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: So Madagascar? 23MR IRVING: Madagascar. (To the witness): Was Madagascar a 24feasible operation, in your view? 25A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
On the basis of the continued British effective command 26over the seas, it became clear well into the war that it

. P-117

1was not. I mean, obviously, it requires the ability to 2travel across -- this is the plan, the solution, the plan 3to deport the Jews to Madagascar clearly requires command 4over the seas. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
But if the war had come to an end and an agreement had 6been reached with Vichy France or whichever French 7government was in power? 8A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
This is getting into extremely hypothetical realms because 9that makes assumptions about how the war might have come 10to an end and then about international agreements, and so 11on. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
I think the question I am really asking is did the Germans 13regard it as a feasible operation or was it just baloney? 14MR JUSTICE GRAY: At what date? I think that is the relevant 15part of the question. 16MR IRVING: At all relevant dates when Madagascar was 17discussed, in other words, from 1938 in, I think, June 18when it was first mentioned by Adolf Hitler to Goebbels 19right the way through to July 24, 1942 when it vanishes 20from the map of history? 21A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think they certainly took it seriously. There is quite 22a large amount of discussion about it in 1940 through 231941. I think it became increasingly clear in the course 24of 1941 that the conditions were not right. Of course, 25the invasion of the Soviet Union changed the picture 26somewhat and I think by the middle of 1942 it certainly

. P-118

1was not taken seriously and references to it, I think, can 2be regarded as camouflage. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
Were these discussions that you are talking about at 4Hitler's level as well? 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Including at Hitler's level, yes. 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
Including at Hitler's level. At least for sometime, in 7your view, the discussions were not baloney, they were 8meant seriously? 9A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It certainly looks like that from the documents, so 10whether it was realistic is another matter, but they 11certainly took it seriously. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is it not difficult to reconcile that notion with a Nazi 13ideological desire to exterminate all the Jews they could 14get their hands on? 15A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, as we know, the Nazi desire to exterminate all the 16Jews they could get their hands on only became, at least 17it grew in the course of war. I think while -- there are 18really two answers to that. One is that the systematic 19extermination of the Jews did not begin until well on into 20the autumn of 1941, and about the time in which the 21Madagascar plan began to, as it were, take second rank and 22then began to fade away. 23 Secondly, of course, I do think that one has to 24remember that the Madagascar plan, such as it was, I do 25not think it was ever seriously worked out in detail, was 26one which deported the Jews across the seas in, one

. P-119

1presumes, extremely poor conditions, and just dumped them 2on a large, somewhat inhospitable tropical island in 3conditions that were entirely unsuited to sustaining a 4large society of millions of Europeans. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
Would those conditions have been worse than in a slave 6labour camp like Auschwitz or better? 7A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not accept that the conditions in the slave -- sorry, 8I do not accept that Auschwitz was simply a slave labour 9camp. That is the first thing I would say. The second is 10that it is very conjectural, but they may well have been 11comparable certainly in terms of disease, malnourishment. 12It is sort of a parallel in a way to the ghettoization, 13I think. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
Do you accept that the population of Madagascar has grown 15from around 2 million in 1938 to 13 million now? 16A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not see what the relevance that is to -- of that is 17to Nazi plans in 1940 and '41. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
The final question on this field. What you are saying, in 19other words, is that Nazi ideology towards exterminating 20the Jews changed sometime in 1941 from getting them out of 21sight, effectively, to exterminating them? Is that what 22you are saying, there was a change in their ideology? 23A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
There is a sort of continuum. I think that Nazi 24anti-Semitism always had its murderous elements, as became 25clear immediately on the invasion of Poland or, indeed, in 26the Reichskristallnacht and so on. But the systematic

. P-120

1extermination of European Jews was a policy that only 2gradually became formulated in the course of 1941 and the 3early months of 1942. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
Would you turn now to page 173? We will just look very 5briefly at your four central tenets of Holocaust denial. 6You think that to be Holocaust denier, you have got to be 7somebody who says that the number of Jews killed by the 8Nazis was far less than 6 million? Is that one criterion? 9A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That is, yes. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
I am not quite clear about the criteria. Does one have to 11be a member of each of these four groups or any one of 12them? 13MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think we have had this before and the 14answer is, no, you do not have to be a subscriber to all 15four views. You can, as it were, adopt one or two of them 16and you can hold them in a full-blooded way or less so. 17MR IRVING: So any one would qualify you to be the title. 18MR JUSTICE GRAY: Professor Evans, you have dealt with this 19before in your evidence? 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I have dealt with this before -- it is on the transcript, 21my Lord. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: It is on the transcript. 23MR IRVING: Yes, but if his Lordship is right, then his 24Lordship is, effectively, saying that anybody who says the 25figure is not 6 million but 5 million or 4 million is a 26Holocaust denier.

. P-121

1MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am not saying anything. I am saying what 2Professor Evans said yesterday. 3A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
If I may say, sir, what I argued was that you really need 4all four. 5MR IRVING: All four? 6A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It is a package, but that, of course, it is a kind of 7fluid, and I said earlier on that there are some people 8who will deny one, deny the other, partially deny one 9proposition, partially affirm another. It is not 10something that ---- 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
It sounds to me as though the package is adjusted 12according to whom you are trying to sling it around the 13neck of? 14A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, that is not the case. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, you are just saying that one has to be a member of 16all four except in some circumstances when it can be less 17which seems to be ---- 18A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Sorry, no. What I am saying is that it is a matter of 19degree and so on, but I would describe Holocaust -- 20I would have no doubt that someone who subscribed to all 21four propositions was a Holocaust denier in the sense that 22is generally understood. 23Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
And, indeed, appears in Professor Lipstadt's book. 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
So we rapidly wrap up that passage, the second criterion 26is that the person says that gas chambers were not used?

. P-122

1A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
If somebody says they were used in some places but not in 3other places, does he qualify or ---- 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, no, not if he or she is accurate. I mean, clearly, 5gas chambers were used in some ---- 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
If somebody says that they were used in a small scale but 7not on a large scale? 8A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am trying to give you an extremely brief summary of a 9rather lengthy section of where I go into these in a great 10deal more detail. 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
This is what is at the root of the case, you appreciate 12that? 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Of course I do. That is why I have written this section. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, it is quite a brief section and I am trying to 15establish ---- 16A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, I mean the whole section on Holocaust denial, not this 17very brief conclusion. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
But if somebody denies that the gas chambers were used on 19a mass factories of death basis, but they were used on a 20smaller scale, wherever, would he be a Holocaust denier? 21A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well I have explained earlier on that this very, that what 22I mean is that gas chambers were not used for the 23systematic extermination of large numbers of Jews, that is 24what... 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
The third criterion is that there was no systematic 26killing of Europe's Jews, in other words ----

. P-123

1A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, that is right, that it was not systematic, yes. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
I think we all understand what we mean by that. 3A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
If it was haphazard, if somebody accepts it is haphazard 5but denies it was a government action, State action? 6A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
Then he qualifies, he is a Holocaust denier. Then the 8fourth one is the propaganda story, the fact ---- 9A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
--- that the Allies invented this story as a propaganda? 11A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That is right. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. But as you are having difficulty even now in 13determining to the satisfaction of myself, certainly, and 14a large number of people in this court, perhaps, exactly 15what is meant by these four criteria, it is a bit of a 16vague concept, is it not, but it is like an elephant, you 17know what it is, you cannot necessarily describe it, is 18that right? 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am not having difficulties, Mr Irving. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, I am having difficulty getting a clear definition 21from you on any one of these four. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, I have been told what the 23definition is. It is for me to decide whether it is a 24satisfactory definition, but I am in absolutely no doubt 25what the definition is. It could not be more clearly set 26out.

. P-124

1MR IRVING: You accept that one has to be a member of all four 2or just one of them? 3MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, I think I said a few minutes ago when 4reciting what Professor Evans has said, no, he does not 5think you have to subscribe to all four view points. 6MR IRVING: But am I right in believing that it is your 7Lordship who decides rather than the witness's 8definition? 9MR JUSTICE GRAY: Of course it is. 10MR IRVING: Yes. Can we now proceed to "Connections with 11Holocaust deniers" which is section 3.5, page 174? The 12burden of the charge you are trying to make here, am 13I right, is guilt by association? "Tell me who your 14friends are and I will tell you who you are", I think is a 15Spanish expression, is that correct? 16A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, it is not, no. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
You list here a number of names of people who you identify 18as Holocaust deniers and you say because these people have 19been seen in the same room as me, effectively, this makes 20me one too. Is that putting it too simply? 21A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
Right. Can we leap straight ahead to page 183 because 23this, I think, justifies me in doing the leap? Beginning 24at paragraph 15, we are talking about the institute of 25Historical Review, is that right? 26A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes.

. P-125

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
And you do not consider this is a bona fide Institute at 2all, do you? 3A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
It is just comprised of people who have no qualifications 5and have the wrong views or views you disapprove of? 6A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, I do not say that. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. But what you do make plain at the beginning of this 8paragraph 15, and I quote: "Irving has denied that he is 9affiliated to the Institute in any formal capacity, and 10this is strictly speaking true"? 11A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. I go on to say: "He is a member neither of its 12Board nor of the Editorial Advisory Board of its 13Journal". I think it is only fair of me to point that 14out. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, do you accept that this is true? 16A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
That I have no affiliation whatsoever with that body. 18A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No formal affiliation. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, what other kind of affiliation can there be? 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
An informal affiliation. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
What do you mean by informal affiliation? That they send 22unsolicited materials to me? Is that an informal 23affiliation? 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No. I go on to describe that in the rest of the 25paragraph. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
"He has been a frequent visitor", line 3 on page 184, is

. P-126

1that correct? 2A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, you have been a frequent visitor. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
"... frequent visitor to the annual conferences organized 4by the Institute of Historical Review"? 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That is right, yes. You spoke. 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
Can you estimate how many times in the last 17 years I 7have visited these conferences to justify the word 8"frequent"? 9A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Why have you chosen 17 as a number? 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
Because it is 17 years. 11A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Since what? 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
Between -- over the period you are talking about. 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Oh, I see. Well, it is -- you are ---- 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
How many is frequent? 20, 30, 50? 15A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Your contacts of -- your speech of speeches ---- 16MR JUSTICE GRAY: They are annual, so it could not be more than 1717, could it? 18MR IRVING: My Lord, I can cut to the bottom line, as we say, 19and say the answer is five. Would you say that the 20correct number of occasions on which I have attended their 21annual conference in whatever capacity is five? 22A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, speaking. I say here: "To date you have spoken to 23audiences at the Institute five times. You spoke at the 24ninth, tenth, eleventh and twelfth conferences in 25succession". So at that time, therefore, that is in the 261990s, I think, am I right, you are ----

. P-127

1MR IRVING: It is a span of 17 years. 2A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, at that time, that is to say, in the immediate run up 3to Professor Lipstadt' book, you were there on an annual, 4virtually an annual basis. There were also many articles 5about you in the Journal that the Institute prints and 6many articles by you. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
I am picking on this word "frequent" visitor to the annual 8conferences and it turns out to be five times in 17 years? 9A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
You spoke at the ninth, tenth, eleventh and twelfth 10conferences in succession and at one other conference. 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
That sounds like five to me. 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, that is four and one other conference, and at that 13time you were a frequent visitor. I do not say you are a 14frequent -- I do not say, "He is a frequent visitor at the 15annual conferences", I am saying you have been and I 16then go on to say precisely which conferences you spoke 17at. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
Five times in 17 years does not -- but I do not want to 19keep on hammering this point in otherwise I shall earn a 20rebuke. 21A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Four times in four years, Mr Irving, that is frequent. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
Five times in 17 years is not a frequent visitor, by any 23reckoning, is it? 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Four times in four years is a very frequent visitor, 25Mr Irving. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
What makes you think that the ninth, tenth, eleventh and

. P-128

1twelfth conferences were on an annual basis? 2A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Ah, you may be -- you may have me there. Were they not? 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
No. But you are assuming that they are? 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, I thought they were, I must say. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
So the word "frequent", in other words, is wrong? 6A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Are you telling me they are not then? Would you like to 7tell me the dates of those conferences? 8Q.
[Mr Irving]
They are either every two or three years. 9A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
So in that case, 17 years, there would be eight, seven or, 10let me see, eight or nine conferences, so that five visits 11is actually rather frequent; it is the majority of them, 12is it not? 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
Do you agree that five times in 17 years does not qualify 14for the word "frequent visitor"? 15MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think the point he is making is that if 16they are every two or three years, you have been to every 17single one. I mean, that is the result of what you ---- 18MR IRVING: I must have learned English at a different school. 19The word "frequent" to me does not imply five times in 17 20years, my Lord. 21A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
But, Mr Irving, if you are saying that the conferences 22took place every two or three years, then in 17 years 23there can only have been six or seven, or at most eight 24conferences, and you admitted, you said that you were at 25five of those, that is almost every one; and that 26certainly justifies saying that you are a frequent

. P-129

1visitor. In fact, if that is the case that the 2conferences were not, as I had thought, annual, then 3I would have said an "almost 100 per cent attender", not 4"frequent visitor". 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
Not a frequent visitor? 6A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Almost 100 per cent attender if they were at greater 7intervals than one year each. As it is, I say, "He has 8been a frequent visitor to the annual conferences". Then 9I say, I give when these conferences were, the ninth, 10tenth, eleventh and twelfth conferences in succession. 11That is frequent to me, that period. I am unclear now as 12to whether you think the conferences were annual or not. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
The conferences were held (and I can tell you this) I am 14sure on the basis of once every two years? 15A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Right. 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
And sometimes less frequently. 17A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
In that case, in the last 17 years we are talking about 18majority of the conferences and I think that justifies 19saying that you were a frequent visitor at them. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
Five times is not a frequent visitor and I am sorry to 21have to keep on ---- 22A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Five times is a frequent visitor when there have only ---- 23MR JUSTICE GRAY: This is becoming utterly futile ---- 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
--- been eight conferences. 25MR IRVING: Let us move on. We are now moving on. You quite 26rightly say there have been articles about me in the

. P-130

1Journal. Are you suggesting that I have in any way 2engineered these articles about me in the Journal of the 3Institute? 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
In the fourth and sixth issues of Volume 13. That shows, 5I think, that the Journal thought highly of you. 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
I now start six lines from the bottom: "The first issue 7of volume 13 included one article by Irving and two others 8about him. The next issue had another article by Irving, 9and he also printed two more articles in the first volume 10of" -- have you any evidence that I have on any occasion 11whatsoever written an article for the Journal? 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, we have been through this before, Mr Irving, last 13Thursday. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes, and what was the answer? 15A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
The answer was that these are edited versions of the 16speeches you gave at your frequent visits to the 17Institute's conferences, and that I presume that these 18versions appeared as articles in the Journal with your 19approval and permission since, presumably, they are 20copyright, its copyrights assigned to you. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
Do you accept that ---- 22A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Are you suggesting that they appeared without your 23knowledge and without your permission? 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
This is not the question and you cannot ask me questions, 25Professor. Are you suggesting that there is no 26distinction between an article written by an author for a

. P-131

1journal and a paper written by that journal? 2MR RAMPTON: I have to say, my Lord, I do find this very 3trying. Time is passing. I do worry about creatures like 4Reichskristallnacht and Schlegelberger and all those 5people down the line. We know from Mr Irving's own 6answers in cross-examination that the Journal reprints 7versions of his speeches which he has edited and approved 8in advance of publication. 9MR JUSTICE GRAY: I remember. 10MR RAMPTON: It is on the record. 11MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am anxious not to interrupt too much, but 12Mr Rampton is plainly right. 13MR RAMPTON: I know that, but I have a duty to the court and 14also to my clients. 15MR JUSTICE GRAY: It is not a criticism of you. I think you 16have been very restrained, but it is very difficult, 17Mr Irving. I really cannot tell you often enough that 18I want to get on to the meat of Professor Evans' report. 19MR IRVING: I have assured you how far we shall certainly get. 20MR JUSTICE GRAY: We have had two full days' of 21cross-examination and we still have not got there. We 22have not even begun. 23MR IRVING: My Lord, I am not responsible for the fact that the 24instructing solicitors did not instruct the witness to 25write his report in a way which would be useful to this 26court.

. P-132

1MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, well ---- 2MR IRVING: I can only cross-examine on the basis of the report 3which is before your Lordship and myself. 4MR JUSTICE GRAY: When the Judge tells you time and again that 5he is not deriving any assistance from the 6cross-examination on these earlier passages in the report, 7surely, Mr Irving, it makes sense to get on to what the 8court wants to hear about. 9MR IRVING: But if your Lordship were to say to me, "Mr Irving, 10tear up pages 1 to 250 of the report", I would willingly 11have done so. 12MR JUSTICE GRAY: Right, on to the next point. 13MR IRVING: No one would have done so more willingly than I. I 14have had to devote a lot of very scarce resources to going 15through these in great deal on the basis that they are 16before your Lordship also and I cannot allow these ---- 17MR JUSTICE GRAY: Let me tell you this, Mr Irving, it is the 18last case I would want to do this, but what sometimes has 19to happen is that one says after a certain amount of 20cross-examination, "Right, this is going too slowly. You 21have X amount of time to complete the cross-examination". 22I would be very loath to do that in a case of this kind, 23but I can see that coming if we do not move to what really 24is at the heart of Professor Evans's expert report. 25MR IRVING: My Lord, I said very clearly yesterday that I was 26going to ask for two and a half more days. I shall

. P-133

1certainly keep to that timetable which I think allows 2possibly sufficient time for re-examination in the 3remaining half day. 4MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am really interested to hear Professor 5Evans being cross-examined by you on these points that 6makes on the historiography. 7MR IRVING: But he has also made these points on guilt by 8association, my Lord, and they stand unless I challenge 9them. He says that Judge Steglisch was once introduced to 10me at a hotel breakfast, this kind of thing. 11 Page 184, witness. We are still back on 184. 12You complain about the fact that the IHR sells my books or 13advertises my books. 14A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, I am not complaining at all. Who am I to complain 15about that? 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, you say that they advertise my books -- the second 17and third lines, the book is obtainable through the 18Institute. 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 20MR JUSTICE GRAY: Look. What he is saying in the whole of that 21paragraph is that you are closely associated with the 22IHR. If you want to put to him that you are no more than 23the occasional speaker at the odd conference, put that and 24then move on. If that is your case? I do not know what 25your case is. 26MR IRVING: It certainly is. Professor Evans, are you familiar

. P-134

1with any of the other speakers there? Would you agree 2that John Toland is an occasional speaker at the IHR 3conferences? 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think he has spoken once, to my recollection. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is John Toland a Pulitzer prize winning author on the 6American literary scene? 7A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Plenty of people have won Pulitzer prizes. It does not 8mean to say that I think that their views are admirable 9simply because of that. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is he a Holocaust denier or right-wing extremist, to your 11knowledge? 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That I do not know presently. I know him only as the 13author of a biography of Hitler. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
Are you familiar with the fact that the Canadian liberal 15journalist and author Jim Back has spoken at the IHR? 16James Back? 17A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes or no? 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, I am. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
Are you familiar with the fact that the Japanese 21general Hidi Omiki has spoken at the IHR? 22A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Let me just mention James Back because he is an author who 23has claimed that many, and I go into this on page 186 of 24my report. 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
He is a Holocaust denier? 26A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
He is somebody who has written two books now, alleging

. P-135

1that the Americans murdered six million Germans after the 2end of the Second World War, that they deliberately killed 3at least a million German prisoners of war at the end of 4the Second World War. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
Has that book been taken very seriously? 6A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No. I do not regard him as a serious author and, of 7course, as I say, his paranoid style of writing based on 8the manipulation of statistics which historians have 9easily shown to be totally false, bears a striking 10resemblance to the pseudo history of the Holocaust 11deniers, which is no doubt why he has been welcome at 12their meetings and indeed why you quote his work in your 13book on Nuremberg. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
He is a Holocaust denier? 15A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not know whether he is or not, but certainly I think 16his ludicrous ---- 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
Has he not expressed strong opinions against Holocaust 18denial, both in the Canadian press and elsewhere? 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
If you can show me documentary evidence of that, I will be 20prepared to accept it, but not otherwise. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
Are two other speakers at the IHR, the Japanese general 22Hidi Omiki, and the CIA senior official, Victor Marcheti, 23are they Holocaust deniers? 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
What I would need to do to, as it were, make a judgment on 25the full import of what you are saying there is to see 26what they actually said at the meetings of the Institute,

. P-136

1provide documentation of what they said, and if what they 2said has nothing to do with Holocaust denial, then, either 3directly or indirectly, I will accept your point. But 4I do think that Mr Back's thesis of course, I directly 5---- 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
You do not like them, this is plain, right? You do not 7like the thesis of Mr Jim Back? 8A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It is not that I do not like them, Mr Irving, it is that 9they are completely phoney. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
Are you an expert on those matters? 11A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Why do you think that he has alleged that the Americans 12killed 6 million Germans after the end of the Second World 13War. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
Have his books been published by the world's leading 15publishers, including St Martin's Press? 16MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, can we please move on? This is a 17man who says that the Americans killed 6 million Germans. 18One's eyebrows rise slightly, do they not? 19MR IRVING: My Lord, I am not going to go down that particular 20cul-de-sac and, if I had done, your Lordship would have 21reprimanded me. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: You were suggesting that the man was a 23respectable historian. I do not know whether he is or he 24is not, but I really think we must get on, please. 25MR IRVING: I am in a dilemma there because, if I had taken up 26that particular red herring, then I would have been

. P-137

1rightly reprimanded by your Lordship. I have just moved 2on. Is it right to say therefore that the IHR has a 3reputation for inviting revisionist speakers with 4unorthodox views to speak there? 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
In its own self understanding of revisionism, yes, 6revisionism in which Holocaust denial is the central 7element. That not to say of course that every speaker 8there gives a speech which is purely centrally or wholly 9concerned with Holocaust denial, but that is what they are 10about and that is why they invite people like Mr Back. 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
So it is correct to say that sometimes Holocaust deniers 12speak there, but the fact that people speak there does not 13make them Holocaust deniers? 14A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think, if anyone accepts an invitation to the Institute 15of Historical Review, it is quite clear to everybody that 16it is a Holocaust denial Institute with no academic 17respectability or credentials whatsoever and that 18therefore, by appearing there, you are approving, at least 19in part, of what they do. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
So, if somebody comes and speaks at Caius College, they 21would be automatically accepting the tenets of all the 22other professors who have spoken there? Is that the kind 23of position ---- 24MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, please. 25MR IRVING: It is such an absurd kind of argument to make that 26I thought I would highlight its absurdity.

. P-138

1A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not know if that is a question, my Lord. 2MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not think it is. 3MR IRVING: Page 191, paragraph 4, you state that I published 4on my website a very lengthy tract by somebody with the 5pseudonym of Samuel Crowell. 6A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
Very brief answer: Are you familiar with the difference 8between publishing something on a website and just putting 9a link on a website to somebody else's documents somewhere 10else in the world, in other words what is called an 11outlink or hyperlink? 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, I think I am. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
Would it be the same as being editor of a magazine under 14the footnote of the magazine saying, readers might be 15interested in this document by Mr Crowell which they will 16find in that library somewhere over there? Would that be 17a comparison? 18A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
There is a similarity, but of course the link is close in 19the case of the Internet because you do actually have to 20trail across to another library or go out to a bookshop to 21buy the book. You can just flick a switch and it is 22there. 23Q.
[Mr Irving]
But to suggest, as you have, that Irving has published on 24his website this very lengthy tract is in other words 25inaccurate? I have posted a link to a document by another 26author somewhere else.

. P-139

1A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I understood that it was on the Auschwitz section of your 2website. My recollection is that that is where I read 3it. It is on the Auschwitz index, is it not. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
If you had clicked on it, would you have been surprised to 5find that you were no longer in my website but somewhere 6in California? 7A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I have to say I did not realize that, if that is the case. 8Q.
[Mr Irving]
If you are referring to the Auschwitz index, will you 9agree that that same page also has hyperlinks to 10organizations like Niscore and Holocaust History Project? 11Do you know those web sites? 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
You would have to provide me with a print out so that 13I could examine it. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
If I say to you that on those pages you will find a 15hyperlink to Niscore, do you know what Niscore is? 16A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, I know what Niscore is, Mr Irving . 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
What is Niscore? Is it a body friendly to me? 18A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, it is not. I accepted this on Thursday, Mr Irving. 19On your website you do include a reference to, or the 20ability, you say, to make people alert to the fact that 21there is a Niscore website which gives a contrary view to 22your own. Indeed, you print the whole text of my own 23report. That is up on your website. The daily 24transcripts of this trial are on your website. But you 25also use your website to disseminate Holocaust denial 26material, such as that by Samuel Crowell.

. P-140

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is not what I do precisely what a balanced and neutral 2observer should do? He should provide material on the one 3side, material on the other side, and easy instantaneous 4links by Internet to people with a totally contradictory 5point of view? Is that not what I do? The Holocaust 6History Project, Niscore, these are web sites with a 7viewpoint that are completely the opposite and yet I put 8an instant and easy link to them. 9A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, but what you are doing here is suggesting that these 10are two equal sides of some academic scholarly argument 11and therefore you, as it were, give yourself credence and 12respectability by doing that. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
Your final sentence on that page says, "In other words, 14Irving is using his website to publicize Holocaust denial 15material", but you do agree that I publicize the other 16side of the story too, do I not? 17A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, you do. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
You think there is only one side of the story that should 19be publicised? Is that your viewpoint? 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not think that the Internet should be used to 21publicise phoney, fake and falsifying material. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
You would like to see it censored, would you? You would 23like to have automatic filters installed? Is that what 24you are saying? 25A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am not saying that at all. I am saying it is your 26responsibility for what you do.

. P-141

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
In other words, to say that I only publicise Holocaust 2denial material, as you call it ---- 3A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not think I do that. I do not say that. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
You accept that on my website I also put documents giving 5the other point of view? 6MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think he said that two or three times. 7MR IRVING: Yes. Thank you very much. Can you now turn to 8page 193? I am now going to look briefly at the DVU, the 9Deutsche Volks-Union, the German People's Union. Can you 10estimate approximately how long that political 11organization has been active in Germany? About 20 years 12or 30 years? 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
My Lord, I am not the expert on this. I understand there 14is another expert report on this. 15MR JUSTICE GRAY: Is that Professor Funke? 16MR IRVING: Yes. That is why I am only going to question you 17briefly. 18MR JUSTICE GRAY: He is coming. I think he is a better chap to 19ask about DVU. 20MR IRVING: I am only going to question him very briefly, my 21Lord. 22A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am only concerned with it here in so far as it is 23connected with or purveys Holocaust denial. 24MR JUSTICE GRAY: It does not seem to me the best point in the 25world anyway, so let us move on and leave that for 26Professor Funke.

. P-142

1MR IRVING: Just the last line of that paragraph, my Lord, in 2case Professor Funke does not raise it. "Mr Irving had 3also been asked by the DVU 'to do lucrative research in 4the Berlin Document Centre'". That is a quotation from my 5diary. Is that right, May 19th, 1984? 6A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
About 16 years ago. Are you familiar with the lucrative 8research that Dr Frey of DVU asked me to do in the Berlin 9Document Centre? 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Remind me. 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is it right that the Berlin Document Centre at that time 12was an American government organization which held the 13entire biographical records on all the top Nazis? 14A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
Millions and millions of them? 16A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. A lot, anyway. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is it evident from my diary and from the papers that have 18been put before you that the research that Dr. Frey and 19the DVU asked me to was to weasel out the ex Nazis in the 20German government, get hold of their biographical records 21showing they were members of the Nazi party, and is this a 22despicable thing to have done, or in any way would you 23wish to criticise that kind of operation? 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It depends for the purposes for which they want to do it. 25For all I know, they may want to do it to make contact 26with them and applaud them.

. P-143

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
In the spirit of his Lordship's admonition, I shall move 2on. Just briefly though, you do accept that the German 3People's Union has at all times been a legal body and has 4never ever come up against the legal authorities in 5Germany? 6A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think this is more a matter for Professor Funke, really 7but I understand that it has been under constant 8observation by the Germans, or for a considerable time 9under observation by the German Office for the Protection 10of the Constitution at various land branches of that, as 11I say, an extreme right-wing organization. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
Page 195, we are now on a Mr Anthony Hancock. Again, I am 13not going to deal with him in any detail because 14I understand that I am going to be cross-examined on 15Mr Hancock so that is probably the right time to deal with 16that unless your Lordship feels I should fill in any of 17the detail. I am only concerned with the fact that you 18drag in not only Anthony Hancock, but his father, saying 19that he was a former member of Oswald Mosley's 20blackshirts. Should this be held against him? 21A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
I seem to remember that, when I was last in the High Court 2330 years ago, the judge was Mr Justice Lawton, and he had 24also been a member of that organization before the war. 25MR JUSTICE GRAY: My own view of this is, if may say so, 26Professor Evans, by all means criticise Mr Irving for his

. P-144

1relationship with Anthony Hancock if he is a member of the 2National Front and so on, but I cannot for life of me see 3what relevance his father's membership of the blackshirts 4is. 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am happy to have that left out. It is of no great 6importance to my report. 7Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
It is gratuitous and I personally do not think it has 8any significance at all, so I am entirely with you, 9Mr. Irving, if I may say so. 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I understood that both of them published, Did 6 million 11really die, by Richard Harwood? 12MR IRVING: What connection has that with me? 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That is a Holocaust denial book and you have an 14association with Anthony Hancock. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
So a printer prints a Holocaust denial book and this is 16somehow linked immediately to me. Is this the way you 17have built up your evidence? 18A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No. You have an association with Mr Hancock. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
And, because his father -- is that not what the Nazis 20called sippenhaft, if somebody in a family has done 21something wrong, you arrest the whole family? 22A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Let me read the passage from my report: "Anthony Hancock 23junior Anthony Hancock hired the venue and distributed 24tickets for a 'revisionist' seminar in London on 4th July 251992 in which Irving spoke. Hancock's Historical Review 26Press printed Irving's newsletter Focal Point in the early

. P-145

11980s and Hancock was filmed at a Holocaust denial meeting 2in Munich at which Irving was a guest of honour, and there 3were various mentions in your diary of the older Hancock 4who is offering funds and facilities to publish the 5Churchill biography". I am simply trying to establish 6there that you have connections with these two Holocaust 7deniers. 8Q.
[Mr Irving]
This word "Holocaust denier" has become quite frequently 9fixed in your vocabulary, has it not, 300 times in this 10report alone? 11A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I was asked, Mr Irving, to comment on that. 12MR JUSTICE GRAY: Do not rise to the bait. 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am sorry, we have been through that many times before, 14my Lord. 15MR IRVING: Everybody who is sinister is suddenly called a 16Holocaust denier and it begins to grate after a time. Can 17you look at paragraph 11 now? This is the next 18gentleman. 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I will not rise to that, Mr Irving, on his Lordship's 20instructions. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
Here we are: "Perhaps the most sinister of the Holocaust 22deniers with whom Irving has had extensive and long term 23contacts was General Otto Ernst Remer". Is that still 24your view? 25MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think the way to cross-examine, if I may 26say, on this sort of allegation is, I do not know what the

. P-146

1facts are, but, Professor Evans, do you realize that I 2have only met the man twice, or whatever? Asking him if 3it is still his view is not going to help. Just put what 4you say is wrong with the proposition that you have had 5long term contacts with him. That is really the quickest 6way of dealing with it. 7MR IRVING: Will you turn to page 91 of bundle F, please. Is 8that a page from my diary dated July 22nd 1989? 9A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Sorry, which page? 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
91 or thereabouts. 11MR JUSTICE GRAY: Something may have gone wrong with the 12bundle. 13MR IRVING: It has. Towards the end it has become a bit 14screwed up. It will be at the end somewhere. 15A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No. I am sorry, I do not seem to have it. 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
Bundle F? 17MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think 91, oddly enough, seems to be 18missing. 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. I do not have it, my Lord. 20MR IRVING: It will be one of the last two or three pages, a 21page headed July 22nd 1989. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not have it. I think it should be after 23the Spectator letter, and it is not. Some people have 24it. I am sorry, I just do not have it. 25MR IRVING: The content is almost immaterial. Have you found 26it, Professor?

. P-147

1A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, I have not, but I am familiar with it. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
It is a one page entry from my diary July 22nd 1989. Does 3it refer to my driving to a place called Vlotho, and 4meeting a general called Remer? 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. If it helps, this is dealt with in my written 6responses. It would hurry things up a bit. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
Now I come to the question which his Lordship wishes me to 8ask. Will you agree that this is the only one time or 9occasion on which I have ever met General Remer and had a 10conversation with him? 11A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. I will withdraw the "extensive and long term 12contacts". You had contacts with him in 1989 at that 13particular occasion that you mention. There Remer was 14present at Munich on 21st April 1990 when you were 15speaking. You were to have spoken to a meeting which was 16cancelled, a meeting alongside side Remer in 1991. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
I am sorry to halt your flood of rhetoric but can I read 18out to you your first sentence of paragraph 11, please? 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
You had plenty of close and repeated contacts with---- 20MR RAMPTON: I do believe that Mr Irving is occasionally guilty 21of discourtesy. My Lord. I would not interrupt a witness 22like that in that aggressive---- 23MR IRVING: I have to interrupt, Mr Rampton, because otherwise 24---- 25MR RAMPTON: I am speaking to his Lordship, Mr Irving. Please 26remain quiet. I am making an objection to the way in

. P-148

1which Mr Irving is attempting to harrass the witness. 2MR JUSTICE GRAY: The objection is entirely well founded. 3Would you like to pick it up where you left off, Professor 4Evans, which was you were talking of a meeting in 1991. 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, and you had repeated contacts with Karl Philip, who 6was Remer's assistant in 1989 to 1991, page 1967. I 7mention the meeting in Munich again, and of course your 8Action Report website carried an obituary praising Remer 9as loyal to the old cause. So what I think I say I is 10that I withdraw "extensive and long term contacts" and 11I would say that you were in contact with General Remer in 12the period 1989 to 1991 1. 13MR IRVING: Can I now read into the record therefore the 14sentence which you are withdrawing: "Perhaps the most 15sinister of the Holocaust deniers with whom Irving has had 16extensive and long term contacts was General Otto Ernst 17Remer", and it turns out I had a conversation with him 18only once. As your Lordship will see from the diary 19entry, it was an entirely proper conversation where I 20interviewed him for the purpose of the Goebbels book and 21all the rest is waffle. 22A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I have said I would withdraw "extensive and long term". I 23hope that satisfies you. 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
On 197, five lines from the bottom, you say: "He (Irving 25in other words), was active" ---- 26A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, sorry. That is a mistake. That is Remer.

. P-149

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
So you are not suggesting that I was active in the HIAG? 2A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No. That is a misunderstanding on your part, Mr Irving. 3It refers back to Remer early in the sentence. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
I continue: "He was active in the HIAG, an organisation 5for ex members of the SS with which Irving also had 6contacts". 7A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 8Q.
[Mr Irving]
Now what on earth is the source for that particular 9allegation? 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
The February 1979 issue of the HIAG house magazine Der 11Frewillige, volunteer, carries an interview with you by 12someone called Joachim Cannicht, which I presume is a 13pseudonym, and one presumes therefore that contact with 14the magazine and thus with its parent organization were 15necessary in order to set up and carry out the interview 16unless you are telling me you did not give the interview 17or you were not aware of who was doing it. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
So a journalist does or does not have an interview with 19me, which he then passes on to a magazine which publishes 20it, which you say has contacts with the HIAG and out of 21that connection you say I had contacts with the HIAG. In 22other words, if I gave an interview to the Tablet, would I 23have contacts with the Pope? Is what you are suggesting? 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think that is very different. This is the house 25magazine of the Waffen SS Veterans Association, Mr Irving. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
It is exactly the same, is it not?

. P-150

1A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It is not exactly the same. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
If a journalist comes and speaks to me and asks me for an 3interview, and I give him an interview, and he then passes 4that interview on to a magazine which is called Der 5Freiwillige, which I have never heard of from start to 6finish, and you say that that is the house magazine of 7HIAG, which may or may not be true, and you say this is 8evidence of me having contacts (in the plural) with HIAG? 9A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. I assume that someone must have set up the interview 10and that then you must have had the interview. Is this in 11the court's record, because I have a photocopy of this 12here. This is another one of my written answers. I am 13not quite sure why we are going through all these written 14answers to your written questions, I do not accept that 15you were not aware of who was doing the interview or where 16it was going to be published. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
But you are suggesting that I have contacts with HIAG, 18which is a pretty serious and almost indeed a repugnant 19allegation to make. You are saying I do not have just the 20one contact through a journalist but I have contacts in 21the plural with them. You have already withdrawn the 22previous part of this sinister allegation about being a 23contact with a sinister denier, Mr Remer, and it turns out 24that this contact too just turns out to be an interview 25with a journalist? 26A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not think it is just a journalist, Mr Irving,

. P-151

1otherwise why would he have adopted what appears to be 2---- 3MR IRVING: What you think is neither here nor there. It is not 4evidence. 5MR JUSTICE GRAY: Please, Mr Irving, there is no point in 6asking questions if you constantly interrupt the answers. 7I expect you have forgotten what the question is; I have 8certainly forgotten. 9A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. This is not just any old journalist who then gives 10you an interview and then kind of hawks it around until he 11somehow, by some extraordinary chance, comes across the 12house magazine of the Waffen SS Veterans Association and 13manages to find a spot for it there. This is clearly 14somebody who is acting on behalf of this organization and 15its house magazine who comes and interviews you. 16MR IRVING: Then you invite two further questions. Have you 17found in my private diaries, to which of course you had 18complete access for the purposes of this trial, any 19suggestion of any contact between myself and the HIAG or 20any of its officials whatsoever? 21A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, I have not. That does not mean to say of course that 22there were not any. 23Q.
[Mr Irving]
Have you found in all my files of correspondence, to which 24of course you have also had complete access by way of 25discovery, any suggestion of contact between myself and 26the HIAG whatsoever?

. P-152

1A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, but it is the sort of thing you would like to keep 2quiet, is it not? 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
The sort of thing I would like to keep quiet? Are you 4suggesting that I have destroyed ----? 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
You have just denied all knowledge of this magazine and 6this interview, and you describe it as "some journalist" 7who came to you without your knowing what the source was 8and where he was going to place the interview. 9Q.
[Mr Irving]
By your reference to "the sort of thing I would like to 10keep quiet", are you alleging that I have destroyed 11materials instead of properly discovering them? 12MR JUSTICE GRAY: I did not understand that to be the 13allegation. 14A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No. 15MR IRVING: Because it is a very serious allegation to make. 16In fact, it is a criminal charge. 17A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am not saying you destroyed materials, Mr Irving. 18MR IRVING: Destroying evidence instead of producing it for 19discovery. 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I have no evidence that you have destroyed any. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
You have no evidence whatsoever that I have destroyed 22material, rather than produce it for discovery? 23MR JUSTICE GRAY: He did not say that. 24MR RAMPTON: What he said was it does not appear in the diary 25and he is not surprised it does not, considering what a 26tainted piece of information it is.

. P-153

1MR IRVING: That is not what he said. We were talking about 2the letters. 3MR JUSTICE GRAY: As a matter of fact, it is, Mr Irving, but 4I am not going spend time reading back the transcript to 5you because I am very anxious that we move on. 6MR IRVING: The witness has referred to the obituary of General 7Remer. Can I ask that his Lordship be shown the actual 8text of the obituary to General Remer which I published? 9MR JUSTICE GRAY: If there is a reason for my doing so, yes. 10MR IRVING: Because he says I published an obituary of him 11praising him. In fact, I made it quite plain that he is a 12reprobate and an unreconstructed Nazi, and I think that 13words like that should be before the court. 14MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, I suppose, yes, if you want me to look 15at it. 16MR IRVING: Unless your Lordship wishes to move on, in which 17case we can move on. 18MR JUSTICE GRAY: No. If you say that is wrong, I had better 19look at it. 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
May I just read it then? It is quite short. 21MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, do. 22A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
General Remer is dead. "Famed German Army General Otto 23Ernzt Remer, who was forced into exile by Bonn in 1994, 24died in Spain 1985 on October 4th. Born in Brandenborg on 25December 18, 1912 Remer played the key role in crushing 26the uprising against Adolf Hitler by disgruntled officers

. P-154

1and disaffected aristocrats on July 20th 1924 . 2Originally sent by the plotters to arrest propaganda 3minister Dr Goebbels, he learned that Hitler had survived 4the bomb, recognised His Master's voice on the phone, and 5acted swiftly against the plotters. His troops put them to 6death by firing squad in Berlin a few hours later. 7Described by baffled newspaper men as an unreconstructed 8Nazi, Remer remained loyal to the old cause. In 1950 he 9founded the socialist Reichs party. In March 1952 he was 10jailed for three months for slandering the July 1944 11plotters as traitors. The SRP was banned. He allowed his 12name to be used by German revisionists publishing the 13Remer despatch in 1994, sentenced to two years jail 14despite his medals for heroism, advancing years and 15illness. He was wheelchair bound and breathed with an 16oxygen pump. He took refuge in Spain. The Spanish 17government resisted repeated demands by German prosecutors 18for his extradition, saying that his "offences" did not 19exist as such under Spanish law. He is survived by his 20widow Marie Oberstein." 21MR IRVING: So I draw attention to the fact that he founded 22this neo-Nazi party, the Reichs party, and I say that he 23was described as an unreconstructed Nazi, and you left 24that out in the references that you published in your 25report. 26A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
By baffled newspaper men.

. P-155

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. 2A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think the tenor of that obituary is positive, that is my 3reading of it. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
Proceed now to paragraph 15, please, on page 198, the last 5sentence on that line. You say that the activities which 6led to the imprisonment of my friend Gunter 7Deckert included translating a lecture". 8A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, I have got this. 9Q.
[Mr Irving]
Are you aware of the fact that Gunter Deckert served a 10seven year prison sentence for translating that lecture? 11Do you approve of that? 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am not sure what the question is meant to elucidate. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
Just answer the question. Are you aware that he served a 14seven year prison sentence? 15MR JUSTICE GRAY: It is a fair enquiry. So what? 16MR IRVING: It goes indirectly to the political situation in 17Germany where all the historians are encouraged to write 18history one way, and they are sent to prison for seven 19years if they breathe a word in the other direction or if 20they even translate a lecture, my Lord. 21MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not think that has anything to do with 22this case. 23A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Deckert is not an academic historian. He is Federal 24Chairman of the National Democratic Party, which is an 25extreme right-wing political organization in Germany in 26the early 1990s. He has a number of convictions for

. P-156

1incitement to racial hatred, insulting the memory of the 2dead, slandering the Chairman of the Central Council of 3Jews in Germany, and other similar offences. The 4activities which led to his imprisonment, I say, included 5translating a lecture. 6MR IRVING: Are you answering the question or just making a 7speech? 8A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am, because you have misrepresented what I said in my 9report yet again Mr Irving. The activities which led to 10his imprisonment included translating a lecture given in 111991 by Fred Leuchter, denying existence of gas chambers 12at Auschwitz. Then I quote you, "Dear Gunter", you write 13to him, "I am shocked about what the police state has done 14to you yet again". You describe him as a freedom fighter 15and so on, defender of this great cause, which presumably 16is the cause of Holocaust denial. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
You say, "presumably is Holocaust denial"? 18A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
What else? 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is this just your interpolation? 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
What is this great cause that you write about or speak 21about? 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
I am only going to ask you one question. Do you approve 23of people being imprisoned for translating? 24MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, you do not need to answer that question. 25MR IRVING: Exactly. I do not really want to ask questions 26about Deckert here. I think this is not the appropriate

. P-157

1place to ask questions about Deckert. 2MR JUSTICE GRAY: Then we can move on. 3MR IRVING: I was rather shocked that he was allowed to 4continue just reading out the whole of that paragraph. In 5paragraph 16 you summarize. You say: "In general, 6therefore, Irving's close association with virtually all 7the most prominent Holocaust deniers in several different 8countries demonstrates once more that he is to be counted 9amongst their number". How many have you actually dealt 10with in this chapter? About five people? 11A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Goodness. Do you really want me to count, Mr Irving? 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
Of the order of five or ten? I am not counting their 13fathers, just the actual people. 14A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think the senior Hancock is a Holocaust denier. Eleven, 15I think. 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
Eleven. 17A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
There are not very many of these people. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
There are not very many, exactly, and we have already 19discovered that I had no contact with Mr Ahmed Rami, who 20is paragraph 13. 21MR JUSTICE GRAY: We have dealt with Mr Rami. 22MR IRVING: I am just saying, my Lord. I am just knocking some 23off this 13. 24MR JUSTICE GRAY: We not going to go back through all of them. 25MR IRVING: We have discovered that General Remer in fact was 26only talked to once. This is the quality of the evidence

. P-158

1I am up against. This grandiose closing sentence, 2"Irving's close association with virtually all the most 3prominent Holocaust deniers". 4MR JUSTICE GRAY: This is cross-examination, Mr Irving, not a 5speech. So move on to your next question, if you would? 6MR IRVING: Then on page 200, you conclude at 3.6.1.: "Not 7everyone who has studied Irving's writings and speeches in 8the 1990s has reached the conclusion that he has become a 9consistent and undeviating Holocaust denier". You then 10mention one or two cases, do you not, and immediately bang 11them on the head for it? 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, I felt it fair to mention that. I did not want to 13suppress that fact. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
Do you accept what they say? 15A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, I do not. 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
Halfway down that paragraph you say: "Moreover, in the 17course of his conversation with Rosenbaum", now he is a 18Jewish writer, is that correct? 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That had not occurred to me actually. If you say he is 20Jewish, I do not usually think about whether people are 21Jewish or not when I read their writings. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
Answer my question. Is it likely that if he is a Jewish 23writer he is probably not going to be disposed to me in a 24very friendly way initially until he gets to know me, is 25that correct? 26A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, it seems to be -- I do not accept that, no.

. P-159

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
"Moreover, in the course of his conversation with 2Mr Rosenbaum, Irving admitted", you say, "of some 3Holocaust deniers 'that there are certain organizations 4that propagate these theories which are cracked 5anti-Semites'". Does that show that I am a great admirer 6of these organizations? 7A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, I do not know. You do not say, or Rosenbaum does 8not say, what organizations you are referring to, so it is 9impossible to guess. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, you would not expect a Holocaust denier like David 11Irving roundly to dismiss other organizations of Holocaust 12deniers as "cracked anti-Semites"? 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Do you do not mention what those organizations are. It 14would be more plausible, more plausible if you did. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, what organizations do you think I was talking about 16there. 17A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I really ---- 18MR JUSTICE GRAY: Why do you not put to the witness which 19organizations you... 20MR IRVING: My Lord, that was going to be the follow up 21question when he answered, "No, I do not know which ones" 22and I was going to say could it possibly be -- would I 23have been talking about the Institute of Historical 24Review? 25A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
You do not mention them. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. Would I have been talking ----

. P-160

1A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It is impossible to tell who you are talking about. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
Are you surprised to hear somebody ---- 3A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
As I say here, you say this without actually saying who 4you meant by this or what kind of damage or harm you are 5referring to ---- 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
Does it surprise you to hear that ---- 7A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
--- the damage done to you. 8Q.
[Mr Irving]
--- I regard a number of these Holocaust deniers as 9"cracked anti-Semites"? 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I have not read anything that you have written that refers 11specifically to any specific individual or organization as 12being "cracked anti-Semites", only these very, very 13general statements which really have very little value 14because they have no precision, no reference. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
They have no precision, but this is as represented by a 16neutral observer who has spoken to a lot of authors, and 17do you accept that -- are you surprised to read in a book 18that I have described Holocaust deniers as "cracked 19anti-Semites"? 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I have -- some Holocaust deniers. What you say, "there 21are certain organizations that propagate these theories 22which are cracked anti-Semites" but it is impossible to 23say who you are referring to. 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
Now, Rosenbaum's book was reviewed, thank goodness, by 25Norman Stone who pointed out that Rosenbaum is yet another 26of these ignorant, negligent reviewers whom have met

. P-161

1before, is that is correct; that he had not done his 2homework and he did not know enough to write such a book 3properly? Is that the next paragraph's burden, 3.6.2? 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Let me just have a look. He says that stone was critical 5of Rosenbaum. He said he could not follow subjects, he 6had misunderstood one of books he was writing about. That 7is certainly the case, yes. It is a critical review. 8Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. So why did you mention the Rosenbaum book because 9you do accept that there are serious authors out there who 10accept that I am not a Holocaust denier and that I do have 11differentiated views and that I regard Holocaust deniers 12as "crack pots" and you could not get passed this? 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Nobody says that you regard Holocaust deniers as crack 14pots. What you say is that there are certain 15organizations, unnamed, that propagate these theories 16which are cracked anti-Semites. You do not say that all 17Holocaust deniers are crack pots. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
Does it matter what the name of the organization is if I 19just refer to Holocaust ---- 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, of course it does because this is so vague it is 21completely meaningless. It is just -- I mean, one could 22read this as just some kind of alibi. It has no reference 23at all. It is a meaningless statement unless you actually 24say who you are talking about. 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
I could hardly be more specific. 26MR JUSTICE GRAY: Put to him the organizations that you regard

. P-162

1as consisting of cracked anti-Semites. Is the IHR one of 2them? 3MR IRVING: I did, my Lord, and he waffled. We did not get a 4clear answer. 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, let me say ---- 6MR JUSTICE GRAY: So your case is -- I want to be clear about 7this -- you do regard the IHR as an organization 8consisting of cracked anti-Semites, is that your case? 9MR IRVING: I think that the correct thing to say there is that 10it consists of some elements which are cracked 11anti-Semites. I do not think I would wish to brand an 12entire organization. As far as I know, some of the 13officers of that organization, I would regard them as 14cracked anti-Semites. That is the point I wanted to make 15plain in my discussion with Mr Rosenbaum, but I 16would respectfully submit ---- 17MR RAMPTON: I would like to know who those people are. It has 18some bearing on what is to come. 19MR IRVING: Your time will come in cross-examination, 20Mr Rampton, to ask that question, and it would be helpful 21if you did not interrupt. I would say that ---- 22MR RAMPTON: Perhaps it would have more value, my Lord, if it 23came directly now, otherwise we may find a list composed 24later. 25MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, if I may say so, Mr Rampton, since 26Mr Irving has taken the point that he does not want to say

. P-163

1at this stage in the course of his cross-examination of 2Professor Evans, I think he is entitled to say that. 3MR RAMPTON: All right. 4MR IRVING: And I would respectfully submit ---- 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
However, Mr Irving, if you were, of course -- if you do 6think that the certain organizations that propagate these 7theories and certain organizations, not individuals, which 8are cracked anti-Semites and if the Institute of 9Historical Review is an organization which is cracked 10anti-Semites, then it is extraordinary that you should 11have spoken so regularly at their meetings in the course 12of the 1990s. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
Do you consider this view, as you just stated, expressed 14to Mr Rosenbaum, as a kind of alibi that I just use to 15people like him? 16A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, in its vagueness, it sounds rather like that to me, 17but I am speculating there. I am simply quoting your 18statements here. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is this the only occasion when I have expressed such a 20view, to your knowledge, having had complete access to all 21my papers? 22A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think there is one other occasion, but I cannot recall 23exactly where it is. 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
Can I suggest you look at page 90 of my bundle, please? 25A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Ah, yes. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
A letter to "Dear Connie" -- does your Lordship have it?

. P-164

1MR JUSTICE GRAY: Sorry, when you say your bundle, do you mean 2F? 3MR IRVING: Bundle F, yes. 4MR JUSTICE GRAY: 90, that is a letter. 5MR IRVING: "Dear Connie""? 6A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, I have this, yes. 7MR JUSTICE GRAY: "Dear Miss Kadashka" I have got at page 90. 8MR IRVING: No, it has to be "Dear Connie". 9MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mine is 89, but it does not matter. 10MR IRVING: Is this letter dated June 24th 1988? 11A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It is, yes. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is this about two months after I read the Leuchter report, 13in other words, two months after the Zundel conference -- 14the Zundel trial? 15A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
The trial. 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. 17A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
You will have to remind. 18MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think that is right. Take it from me. 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Is that right? OK. 20MR IRVING: Can I read to you the final paragraph or the bits 21thereof? First of all, looking at the address at the 22bottom, am I writing to my publishers, William Morrow & 23Company in New York ---- 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
--- who published the Goring biography. "I have been 26invited to speak as a guest speaker at a right wing

. P-165

1function in Los Angeles next February. They have offered 2a substantial fee and all my expenses and until now I have 3adopted a policy of never refusing an invitation if the 4organizers meet my terms, namely free speech and fat fee. 5On this occasion I intend to give the audience a piece of 6my mind about some of their more lunatic views". Does it 7say that? 8A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It does indeed, yes. 9Q.
[Mr Irving]
So, in other words, I do not just express views about 10crack pot anti-Semites and crack pot ideas or whatever as 11an alibi, but on the evidence of this letter (which 12I found in the early hours of this morning by chance) on 13quite a few occasions I have expressed robust views about 14people I associate with? 15A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
This, Mr Irving, is not evidence of what you actually said 16at this meeting, if you indeed went to it. It is simply a 17letter to a publisher, obviously. You do not say what 18their lunatic views are and there is no evidence here that 19you have gave them a piece of mind. 20MR JUSTICE GRAY: Who was the right-wing organization holding a 21meeting in? 22MR IRVING: That was the IHR, my Lord. That was precisely this 23body, the Institute of Historical Review, who at that time 24were under different management, if I can put it like 25that. 26MR JUSTICE GRAY: So the lunatic views attached to the old

. P-166

1management, not to the present regime, is that it? 2MR IRVING: I shall be submitting to your Lordship at the 3proper occasion that as the years passed, I tried to 4persuade them to adopt a more serious profile, to invite 5respected historians as well as more unorthodox 6revisionist historians and try to straighten their act 7out, if I can put it like that. There is correspondence 8---- 9MR JUSTICE GRAY: So you did have an association that enabled 10you to bring that sort of pressure to bear, did you? 11MR IRVING: Oh, yes. They looked to me. They were constantly 12wooing me and I wrote them letters saying, "In my view, 13you should do this and you should do that", and I am sure 14they got similar advice from other people. 15MR JUSTICE GRAY: Thank you very much. 16MR IRVING: Thank you. So do you accept that on the basis of 17those two letters I had a robust attitude towards the 18Institute which indicated I was in no manner travelling in 19their tow or in their wake? 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Sorry, what is the other letter? 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, on the basis of the Ron Rosenbaum ---- 22A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Ah, yes, the interview. 23Q.
[Mr Irving]
--- matter and this letter. 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I have to say that on the basis of having read your 25speeches or articles in the Institute and its Journal that 26you did come to them in the 80s for the first time that

. P-167

1you went to speak at the Institute with what seems to me 2like a certain apprehension of the fact that your views 3would differ somewhat from theirs, but this disappears, in 4my view, entirely in the 1990s when you were a regular 5attender at their conferences and a regular speaker. 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
At their conferences I regularly rubbed their noses in 7what actually happened in the Holocaust and that I read 8out the Bruns' interrogation report in all its gory detail 9of the shootings on the Eastern Front, and that I was held 10up to criticism by some of their members for doing this? 11A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
You read out parts of the Bruns' report, excluding the 12reference to Hitler's order which we went through sometime 13ago in this trial. You have a very selective version of 14it. I think you did say at the beginning of this trial 15you had not actually read it out before. 16 I do not deny that there were some arguments in 17discussion (as there always is in discussions) after your 18speeches, but in the 1990s I think you were purveying the 19same views as they had on the whole. There were some 20minor differences between yourself, in particular, 21Professor Faurisson, but your speeches to the Institute of 22Historical Review did not meet with jeers and cat calls, 23as I recall. 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
They did not meet with jeers and cat calls. Do you 25believe that a body like the Institute of Revisionist 26Historians, or whatever they call themselves, performs any

. P-168

1useful function at all? 2A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
Do you accept that without the existence of such a body 4there would have been such major concessions in the 5Holocaust story that have occurred since the end of World 6War II? 7A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, to the question and no to the premise. 8Q.
[Mr Irving]
Have there been major concessions in the story since the 9end of World War II? 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
You would have to tell me exactly what they were and 11demonstrate that they were based on the work of the 12Institute of Historical Review before I accepted that. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is it true that the Israeli authority at Yad Vashim now 14officially agree that the Nazis never manufactured soap 15from bodies? 16A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think that has long been the case. Indeed ---- 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
Can you put a date on it? 18A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, I cannot, no. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
Was it about 1989? 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I would have to see documentation of that. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
Do you agree that the figure of Auschwitz has been brought 22down from 4 million to 1.5 million? 23A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
We have already been through that. 24MR JUSTICE GRAY: We had this, I think, last Thursday. 25MR IRVING: I am just trying to look at the concessions that 26have been made largely as a result of revisionist

. P-169

1agitation, if I can put it like that? 2A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not think, Mr Irving, that that was the result of the 3work of the Institute of Historical Review which was not 4founded at the time that that number was changed. 5MR IRVING: Have you read the work of Michael Berenbaum -- I am 6sorry, of Aberhard Jackeln who states that it was not 7until 1977 that the whole of this Holocaust research 8industry began, that the historians started doing their 9job? 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think we have already been through that, I think, when 11you cross-examined Professor Browning, that certainly 12I would need to see a copy of that statement by Professor 13Jackeln, but if he does say that, then he is certainly not 14correct. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
You would not agree, therefore, that the revisionists, 16having created the Aunt Sally which the genuine historians 17needed, the scholars needed, you do not agree with the 18premise that the scholar would not have done the job as 19rigorously as they have had to? 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, not at all, no. I have to say, on the whole, I do not 21serious scholars pay any attention to the work of the 22Institute of Historical Review at all. 23MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, I wonder whether the time has not 24come to move on to what is important which is page 205, 25what you have written about Hitler. 26MR IRVING: Well, I, in fact, leapt on to page 207, my Lord.

. P-170

1MR JUSTICE GRAY: Good. 2MR IRVING: Would you look at that quotation at the top of page 3208? 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
208? Yes. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. Have you left anything out of that quotation, do you 6think? 7A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Not that I can see. 8Q.
[Mr Irving]
It is about the euthanasia programme, is it not? 9A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
If I start reading about where it says: "About a quarter 11of a million hospital beds", I am going to read it from 12the book which is the actual source, which is the 1977 13edition at page 20? 14A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Could I have a copy, please? Page 20? 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. "About a quarter of a million hospital beds were 16required" -- this is the actual text -- "for Germany's 17mental institutions for Germany's disproportionately large 18insane population, a result of centuries of lax and 19indiscriminate marriage laws: of some 7 or 800,000 people 20all told, about 10 per cent were permanently 21institutionalized. Others were in and out of hospitals. 22They occupied bed space and the attention of skilled 23medical personnel which Hitler now urgently needed for the 24treatment of the casualties of his coming campaigns". You 25missed passages out without indicating it, have you not? 26A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Let me just have a look at this.

. P-171

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
Three passages have vanished? 2A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, let me try to sort this out. Certainly, those two 3passages, the passage you read and this passage, would 4seem to indicate that. Now, here I refer to, it is 5actually pages 227 to 8 of the 1991 edition that I am 6citing, as you can see from the bottom of the previous 7page. Could I have the 1991 edition, please? We have 227 8to 8. No, it is the wrong one. 227 to 8. 9MR JUSTICE GRAY: About a third of the way down. 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Right, let me read this from page 227 of the 1991 11edition: "About a quarter of a million hospital beds were 12required for Germany's disproportionate large insane 13population: of some 7 or 800,000 victims of insanity all 14told, about 10 per cent were permanently 15institutionalized. They occupied bed space and the 16attention of skilled medical personnel which Hitler now 17urgently needed for the treatment of the casualties of his 18coming campaigns". 19 So I have quoted absolutely correctly from the 20source that I give without any omissions at all. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
But you have not actually realized that, in fact, the 22original quotation was fuller and you preferred the 23abbreviated version to base your ---- 24MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, really! What sort of a point is 25that? 26MR IRVING: Page 209.

. P-172

1A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
May I just say, Mr Irving, I think you are entirely right 2to condense that quotation because the reference to lax 3marriage laws in 1977 is entirely wrong. German marriage 4laws up to the middle of the 19th century, in most of 5south Germany, at least, were extremely strict. As you 6say yourself, you are condensing all the way along. There 7is no fault in that. 8Q.
[Mr Irving]
Page 209, paragraph 4.1.8 please. This is the Night of 9the Long Knives? 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Sorry, could you remind me? 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
4.1.8, 209? 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
209? Yes. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
209, you say in the final sentence of that paragraph 144.1.8: "Irving defended the Night of the Long Knives in 15June 1934". This is rather like saying I applauded the 16Holocaust, is it not? 17A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, I think it is somewhat different. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
I "defended the Night of the Long Knives"? 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I go on in the next paragraph to outline your views. You 20say that "the SA was planning to" was underlined -- 21"overthrow Hitler's government". "In an act of rare 22magnanimity Hitler ordered state pensions provided for the 23next of kin of the people murdered in the Knight of the 24Long Knives. Even so he began to suffer nightmares and 25could not sleep" although, in fact, as I point out, Hitler 26personally marked crosses against the names of

. P-173

1considerable numbers of people that he ordered to be 2murdered. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
I am going to come to that in a minute. The idea of 4defending the Night of the Long Knives suggests that I 5defended the murder of people when they were planning a 6revolution? 7A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, the nub of it, of course, is were they planning a 8revolution or not. 9Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well ---- 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
And in any case, and also, of course, the murder, that was 11done wholly outside the judicial process. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
If I establish in a biography of Hitler that, in fact, 13these SA leaders were plotting something, this is not the 14same as defending their murder, do you agree with that? 15A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think it is -- I am prepared to jettison the word 16"defending" and say "excusing". We have been down this 17road before. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
"Excusing" is almost as bad as "defending". But can we 19now move to the next paragraph where you are saying that 20the charges were trumped up. Do you not accept that the 21brown shirt movement were, in fact, planning the overthrow 22of the Nazi government of Germany? 23A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think the evidence is very thin. 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
Have you read various works on the subject, for example, 25by Heinz Werner? 26A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I have read some.

. P-174

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
So you have read some works, but just on the basis of 2having read some works, you are prepared to say that I am 3wrong and that these other authors are wrong? 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, let me see what I say. You see: "Most authors have 5seen the Night of the Long Knives as a shocking violation 6of moral and legal norms" ---- 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. 8A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
---- "in which Hitler not only brought retrospectively 9trumped-up charges against the SA leaders of plotting a 10coup, but also used the opportunity to bump off 11politicians, such as Kurt von Schleicher and Gustav von 12Kahr, who he felt knew too much about his past, or whom he 13simply strongly disliked, and against whom no conceivable 14political suspicions could be directed in 1934". 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
On the basis of your limited knowledge of the Night of the 16Long Knives, what evidence do you have that Hitler ordered 17the murder of Schleicher which was an appalling act -- 18there is no question -- that Hitler was personally 19involved in that? Do you have any evidence? 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not present it here, no. I would have to do some 21research on that. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
And what evidence do you have for saying that Hitler 23personally ---- 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Let me respond to that by saying can you present evidence 25that he did not? Maybe that is the way to go. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
Are you familiar with the excellent paper on the murder of

. P-175

1General Schleicher that was published by the Institute of 2History about 35 years ago, giving the entire background 3of the case? 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I thought you did not read work by other historians, 5Mr Irving. 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
For some historians I make exceptions? 7A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Ah, so you do read work by other historians? 8Q.
[Mr Irving]
This was a documentation. You appreciate the difference 9between a documentation and a book? Two lines from the 10bottom you say: "Hitler personally marked crosses against 11the names of scores of people on the night in question". 12What evidence do you have for that? 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That is what I understand from my reading. I agree, 14I cite in footnote 11 the sources which I have used for my 15extremely brief account of this. 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
So this is one of those cases where the historian has sat 17in his book lined cave and taken four books off a shelf 18and written a fifth, effectively? 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
He has not really added to our knowledge? 21A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not think -- oh, you mean me? 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. 23A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, if you can show that they are wrong or somebody can 24show that they are wrong, then I would be quite happy to 25accept that. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
If you can take it from me that Field Marshal Milch

. P-176

1described to me personally, sitting at the Execution 2Council, together with Himmler and the other leading 3members of that gang, watching as Himmler read out a list 4of names and they personally approved and wrote little 5ticks against the names of those to be liquidated which 6were handed out through the door to the flunkers who 7ordered it carried out, that this was the way the 8Execution Council took place, and that Hitler was nowhere 9near, would you accept that version? It is contained in 10one of the books you have read, the rise and fall of the 11Luftwaffe? 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, Mr Irving. That is a recollection a long time after 13the event. It is not a contemporary document. You 14yourself would be the first to impugn the reliability of 15that source if that source if it said something you did 16not like. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
Would you accept that Milsche kept diaries throughout that 18episode and also that Milsche would hardly relate 19something to me which under circumstances could be taken 20as counting against himself if he was a participant in or 21an eyewitness of this Execution Council? 22A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, this is getting rather hypothetical. If you present 23to me documents that demonstrate that what I say here is 24wrong, I will be quite happy to accept it. 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
That is not the way it works, Professor. 26A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I thought it was the way it worked.

. P-177

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
You are saying here in an expert report which you now 2concede is written on rather flimsy evidence that Hitler 3personally ---- 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not think I did that at all, Mr Irving. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
--- marked crosses against the names of scores of people? 6MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think if you are wanting to say that there 7is documentary support for what you write, Mr Irving, and 8for what Professor Evans criticises, you really ought to 9be equipped to show Professor Evans what you rely on. For 10example, I mean, did you record what General Milsche was 11telling you about the absence of Hitler, and so on? 12MR IRVING: I wrote a whole book about it, my Lord. I wrote 13his biography. He provided his private diaries to me and 14that has been in discovery and in evidence to the Defence 15throughout this case, and I really do not want to hold up 16the matter by producing evidence for that. I have 17only been delayed by the fact that the witness has 18admitted that his evidence for these assertions was based 19on -- his own concession -- very limited sources. 20MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. 21A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not think so I said that. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not think he did, but the point is that 23it is not terribly satisfactory to have cross-examination 24by assertion, if you follow me. 25MR IRVING: Yes. 26MR JUSTICE GRAY: Sometimes I think it is going to be necessary

. P-178

1to give chapter and verse for what you are asserting. 2MR IRVING: Yes. 3MR JUSTICE GRAY: And I know that makes life difficult for you. 4MR IRVING: It is a flimsy assertion against an even flimsier 5submission by the witness, if I can put like that. The 6final sentence there, witness, Professor Evans, is you 7say, you have quoted where I say: "Hitler ordered state 8pensions provided for the next of kin of the people 9murdered in the Night of the Long Knives, as June 30th 1019934 came to be known"? 11A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
Do you have any reason to challenge that statement? 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, I do not. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
You have held it up there for the delectation of his 15Lordship and others as those it is slightly incredible? 16A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, I am giving your views on Hitler here. This is the 17context. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
Should I have cut that out then? 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
You describe Hitler as a dictator by consent, he had an 20act of rare magnanimity in ordering state pensions, he was 21a "friend of the arts, benefactor" -- I am quoting you 22here -- "benefactor of the impoverished, defender of the 23innocent, persecutor of the delinquent" ---- 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
We will come to that one in a minute. 25A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
--- this is what I am trying to establish here. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
But are you suggesting, therefore, that if Adolf Hitler in

. P-179

1this rather odd act of generosity, I suppose, ordered 2bloated pensions provided to the widows of those he has 3just murdered that I should somehow suppress this because 420 years later Professor Evans is going to stand in a 5witness box and say, "This is evidence of Mr Irving's 6admiration for Hitler" that I should not have mentioned 7it, therefore. 8A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It seems to me that it is evidence of your admiration for 9Hitler. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
And you would not, therefore, have mentioned this 11document; you would have pretended this document did not 12exist? Is that the way you would work? 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not understand the question there. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
I cannot understand -- let me put it ---- 15A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Oh, I see what you mean. 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
If you were writing a biography of Hitler, would you have 17left this document out? 18A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Which document? 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
The reference to the pensions. 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, I would have to see the document before I could 21answer that question. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
If you were writing a biography of Hitler and you came 23across a document which said: "The Fuhrer has ordered 24pensions paid to the next of kin of those executed in the 25Night of the Long Knives", would you have left it out? 26A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, of course not.

. P-180

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. So, in other words, you are criticising me for doing 2something that you too would have done, is that correct? 3A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, that is to say, if the document bears, you know, 4sustains the interpretation you put on it. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
Now, moving on to the final sentence of that paragraph 6where you mockingly have quoted where have apparently 7said: "Hitler, according to Irving, was a 'friend of the 8arts, benefactor of the impoverished, defender of the 9innocent, persecutor of the delinquent'", is this not -- 10my memory may be wrong and his Lordship is already looking 11it up -- a slightly mocking entry at the beginning of a 12chapter where, having set that out, I then ---- 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Sorry, could I have the 1991 edition? The first section, 14the first file? 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
Has your Lordship find it? 16A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
109. 17MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, I have. 18MR IRVING: Yes. I do not have it in front me, but my 19recollection is that the way I used that was slightly 20mockingly offsetting it against what then follows. 21A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not think that offsets it. This is the "popular 22dictator, friend of the arts, benefactor of the 23impoverished, defender of the innocent, persecutor of the 24delinquent. In an early Cabinet meeting in June 8th 1983 25he had come out against the death penalty for economic 26sabotage, arguing, 'I am against the death sentence

. P-181

1because it is irreversible. The death sentence should be 2reserved for only the gravest crimes, particularly those 3of a political nature'", and so on. So it does not seem 4to be a kind of ironic or sarcastic setting off. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
Then is there what we call a topic sentence for what 6follows, that having set out the topic sentence, I then 7hang the meat on it, so speak? 8A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not think -- I mean, it is there in black and white. 9"Friend of the arts, benefactor of the impoverished, 10defender of the innocent, persecutor of the delinquent". 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
But do you agree that what follows then effectively hangs 12the meat on that particular topic sentence? 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, it refers back both backwards and forwards. If you 14like, it is a linking sentence. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. Can you now go forward please to page 213? 16MR JUSTICE GRAY: Are you leaving the Night of the Long Knives. 17MR IRVING: I have left it entirely, my Lord, yes. 18MR JUSTICE GRAY: Can I just ask one question? Professor 19Evans, it seems to me -- I may be wrong about this -- the 20sort of main point on the Night of the Long Knives is 21whether or not Hitler was in any way complicit or involved 22in the murder of 90 former associates of the Nazi Party? 23A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, that is correct, my Lord. 24Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
Mr Irving has, as I understand it, put to you that Hitler 25had nothing to do with it, it was Heydrich? 26A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am not sure that is what he says.

. P-182

1MR RAMPTON: I think the position is in the book Hitler is 2guilty of seven only ---- 3MR JUSTICE GRAY: I see. 4MR RAMPTON: --- out of 82 or 90, whatever it is. 5MR IRVING: Can I be more specific? He was guilty originally 6of seven. Eventually, over the next few days he was told 7it was 84 or 90 and in private he expressed annoyance to 8the people who brought the message saying, "It has got out 9of hand" and this is the evidence of the Adjutants 10Bruchner and Schaub, whose papers I quoted on various 11occasions, and, in fact, there is a letter written by 12Victor Lutze, who was the successor of Rume to Himmler 13four years later harking back to that period saying that 14the Fuhrer was very angry that so many people had been 15killed, including some of his closest friends. That is 16one sentence that sticks in his mind. 17MR JUSTICE GRAY: So to that extent, I am grateful to you, 18Mr Rampton, he is disapproving what happened, and I just 19wanted to know, Professor Evans, whether in the light of 20your knowledge of what happened, whether that is an 21account you accept? 22A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No. 23Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
Can you elaborate slightly? 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Sorry. I have been asked to keep my answers short. 25Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
I know. It is very difficult to get it right. 26A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, Hitler was directly responsible for these murders and

. P-183

1these crimes. 2MR JUSTICE GRAY: Thank you. I am sorry, Mr Irving. 3MR IRVING: In that case I will just have to re-examine briefly 4on that. You say he is directly responsible. Do you have 5any evidence whatsoever for that statement on the basis of 6your admittedly flimsy reading on the matter? 7A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, certainly. I mean I quote this in footnote 11 of 8page 209. 9Q.
[Mr Irving]
Other authors. Had any of them had access to the private 10diaries of Dr Joseph Goebbels covering the Night of the 11Long Knives which I had? 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, Kershaw's Hitler certainly and Fry's National 13Socialist Rule in Germany, both of those. The third book 14I mention there is not really about that, but about the 15legal proceedings after 1945 concerned with trying to 16bring the perpetrators to justice. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
Have you read Kershaw's Hitler in this respect? 18A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, I cite it there. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
Would it surprise to you notice that he has made no use 20whatsoever of the new Goebbels' diaries, and corresponded 21with him about this? 22A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
In the entire book? 23Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I would have to check that up. I find that difficult to 25believe. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
Can we now ----

. P-184

1A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It depends what you mean by the "new Goebbels' diaries". 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, the ones that I found in Moscow, the ones that 3I brought back from Moscow in 1992. 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not think that is right, Mr Irving. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, I shall leave my question as it was, that 6I corresponded with him about that and does it not 7surprise you to hear that he told me he had not made use 8of them? 9A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It does because that is not my understanding. You would 10have to show me the letter before I could accept that. 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes, but we are going to make progress now, please, to 12page 213. We are now dealing with the assassination, with 13various things on which I appear to have exonerated 14Hitler. Beginning with the previous page: "Charles 15Sydnor found that I portrayed Hitler not as a monster but 16as a fair-minded statesman of considerable chivalry." 17 Would you have portrayed Hitler as a monster, 18Professor Evans? Do you think that Hitler should be 19portrayed as monster? 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think I am summarizing Sydnor there. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes, but I am asking you. Do you think that Hitler should 22be portrayed as a monster? In other words, am I to be 23criticised for not portraying Hitler as a monster? 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, let us take the full sentence there, not as a 25monster but as a fair-minded statesman of considerable 26chivalry, who never resorted", and so and so forth: "Who

. P-185

1never resorted to the assassination of foreign opponents; 2who never intended to harm the British Empire and wanted 3peace with Britain after June 1940, and who attacked the 4Soviet Union in 1941 only as a preventative measure." 5This is Sydnor. This is in a section in which I am 6commenting and begins in the middle of page 210. I am 7recounting a number of authors who have considered that 8your position is extremely favourable to Hitler. I think 9here again I am trying to -- I am in a slight difficulty 10that I am quoting the views of other authors -- I am 11trying to establish that it is not merely a quirk of 12Professor Lipstadt that she says that you are an admirer 13of Hitler, because this is a view that has been adopted by 14a number of other writers. If you want me to say whether 15Hitler was a monster or not ---- 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
That was the question. 17A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
--- if you want to put in those terms, yes, he was a 18monster. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes, he was a monster. 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It is undeniable. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
We now turn the page, the specific allegations are that 22I said that he never resorted to the assassination of 23foreign opponents. Is that correct? Is that a true 24statement? 25A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
This is what Sydnor says, how Sydnor says you portray 26Hitler. He is not ----

. P-186

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
But you have quoted him. 2A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, I am quoting him. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
Can I ask you on the basis of your knowledge as an 4historian of that period ---- 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am not quoting Sydnor as saying that all these things 6are entirely wrong. 7MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is where we get into difficulties, is it 8not? 9A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 10MR JUSTICE GRAY: What we want to concentrate on, Mr Irving, 11I think is really where Professor Evans states his own 12views. 13MR IRVING: Rather than the views of other people about views 14of other people. 15MR JUSTICE GRAY: Rather than the views of other people. 16MR IRVING: Yes. 17MR JUSTICE GRAY: It is not your fault that you pick up these 18references to other historians because they are there to 19be picked up, but what is going to help me is when you 20tackle Professor Evans about his views about your 21portraying Hitler in a favourable light rather than more 22accurately. 23MR IRVING: Yes. On the facing page -- I will try to move 24forward and your Lordship will appreciate that I am 25abandoning good points there. I am doing it willingly in 26the cause of making court progress.

. P-187

1MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. I have tried to say that I understand 2why you are being distracted, as it were, by these 3references to other historians. That is not your fault. 4MR IRVING: On the foot of page 214 you have, metaphorically 5speaking, raised your eyebrows at the fact that one of 6Hitler's doctors recorded in his diary the fact that 7Hitler had described his future biographer in terms that 8appeared to fit me, if I can put it like that? 9A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. An interesting ---- 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes, a very simple question. 11A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
--- put. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
If that diary does exist then I am perfectly justified to 13quote that whole passage, am I not? 14A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, it is an interesting comment on your attitude of your 15mission. 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
A comment on my attitude? 17A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, what you conceive was your mission. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
If you had got that diary first, you being admittedly not 19English but Welsh, I suppose you would still feel yourself 20qualified by Hitler as being an Englander? 21A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think that Germans, unfortunately, do include the Welsh 22amongst the English, yes. 23Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes, unfortunately. You would have quite happily have 24quoted that, would you now, if you were writing a Hitler 25biography and you came into possession of that diary, you 26too would quote it, would you not?

. P-188

1A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I would have been too embarrassed I think. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
Too embarrassed? 3A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. I certainly would not want to give the impression 4that all these things the Doctor says would apply to me. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, some of them do not of course? 6A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It is a very tempting quotation, but I think I would have 7added that after the end of it "this is not me". He 8records Hitler saying: "Perhaps an Englishmen will come 9one day who wants to write an objective biography of me. 10It has to be an Englishman who knows the archives and 11masters the German language, and that is why you are 12getting the diaries, Mr Irving, the doctor said." I think 13I would have said: Well, I am not going to fit the bill. 14I am not, as a biography of Hitler, his ambassador in the 15afterlife. 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
Does this explain to you why so often I manage to get hold 17of these unusual documents, and there was no kind of 18bribery or promising involved? These people just turned 19this material over to me? 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Does what explain? 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
This kind of episode that I ended up with the good 22fortune. 23A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
You have to give a little more detail. 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
Let us move on. 25A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I am not sure what you mean by that. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
The foot of page 216.

. P-189

1A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
The fact that you are English I do not think makes a great 2deal of difference. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
No, but the fact that I knew the archives and I have taken 4the trouble to learn the language as an Englishman? 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, obviously it would be pointless if you did not know 6any German. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
At the foot of page 216 you state, again without any 8evidence, that there was massive intimidation of the 9electorate in the 1938 plebiscite? 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
Do you have any proof of that? 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, this is the context where you simply say that Hitler 13had risen from nobody, become the admired and respected 14leader of two great nations. Just five years after 1933 15he got 49 million Germans to vote for him which was 99.8 16per cent of electorate. In my response to your questions 17of 4th January 2000, your written questions, I have two 18whole pages accompanied by a considerable amount of 19documentation of the intimidation which took place in the 20plebiscite of 1938. I am not sure -- would it save the 21court's time if I could just refer to this without 22actually going through it? 23MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think so to begin, and then if with 24Mr Irving wants to follow it up then he can. 25MR IRVING: Perhaps I can just ask you in general: Was there 26any evidence that there was not a secret ballot?

. P-190

1A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, there was. Yes. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
In what way do you have that evidence? Is it contemporary 3evidence? 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, there are reports on the plebiscite, official 5reports from electoral authorities which I quote on page 62: "Members of the Election Committee marked all the 7ballot papers with numbers. During the ballot itself a 8voters' list was made up." 9Q.
[Mr Irving]
This is was well-known, is it not, but that is not 10intimidation, is it? 11MR JUSTICE GRAY: Do not keep interrupting, Mr Irving. It 12destroys the whole object of the exercise. 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
The ballot papers were handed out in numerical order. 14Therefore, it was possible afterwards with the aid of this 15list to find out the persons who cast no votes. The 16Gendarmerie stationed in the Bavarian village of Elsass 17reported that the ballot papers of people regarded as 18unreliable had been marked. Reports from the XR 19leadership of the Social Democrats, so-called day reports, 20who have numerous instances, they have a whole section 21which I include here in the documents on the lack of 22secrecy in the voting. 23MR IRVING: Is this evidence of intimidation? 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No. It is evidence of lack of secrecy in the voting, 25which is what you asked the question about. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is there evidence of intimidation?

. P-191

1A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, there is evidence of intimidation. Do you want me to 2go through it? I list it again here and provide 3documentation. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
The fact that ballot papers are marked, just as they are 5in England, and numbered, is not evidence of intimidation 6of any kind of hanky-panky, is it? 7A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No. It is evidence of lack of secrecy of the ballots, as 8the source I quote says, it was possible with the aid of 9this list to find out the persons who cast no votes. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes, but how would this lead to a 99.8 per cent vote? 11A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Ah, because there was enormous -- because, of course, 12people suspected that, well, this is one element in a 13number of elements in these elections. People obviously, 14I think, quite clearly suspected that if they cast a "no 15vote", and rightly suspected if they cast a "no vote", it 16would be identified as theirs and they would suffer the 17consequences. In addition, there was a huge effort in 18which agents of the Nazi Party and various other 19organisations known as Schleppe or people who drag, really 20carriers or draggers of voters to the polls, went round on 21a number of occasions asking people to vote, sending them 22written warnings if they did not, going to visit them, and 23then later on, and I quote a number of examples, 24physically maltreating those who did not vote, taking them 25off to lunatic asylums, expelling the Catholic Bishop of 26Rottenburg from his diocese when he refused to take part

. P-192

1in the vote; dismissal of a street warden in Steischlinger 2for telling people his boss had said that people could 3vole whichever way they wanted, which the boss of course 4denied. There was someone who was identified as voting 5"no" in another community, according to a by day report, 6was identified dragged through the local pubs of the brown 7shirts and put a sign on her back saying "I am traitor" 8and spat at her. There were numerous arrests of known 9opponents of the regime before the vote, 250 people who 10were thought to be opponents of the regime were arrested 11in Leipzig before the vote and then released just in time 12to go to polls. So that it is quite clear what the 13intimidatory effect of that was. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
Are those kinds of measures sufficient to get a 99.8 per 15cent turn out in favour of Adolph Hitler, do you think? 16A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That is a different, that is a somewhat different 17question. What I say is that I think it is clear that 18there is no, I do not know of any democratic and free 19election in which anyone has got 99.8 per cent of the 20vote. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
Would you agree there was a mass ---- 22A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Had the election been free, what the vote would have been 23is another matter. It is a matter for conjecture. What 24I am saying, in other words, is that the difference 25between whatever the result would have been in a free 26election and the amazing 99.8 per cent is the result of

. P-193

1intimidation, pressure, lack of secrecy of the ballot. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
Would you agree there was a massive propaganda effort to 3lead to this huge turn out? 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
There was indeed a massive propaganda effort, yes. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
And that there was in that respect as much carrot as 6intimidation by your account? 7A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not think propaganda is carrot. It is propaganda. 8Q.
[Mr Irving]
Would you agree that in fact the overwhelming majority of 9the German people were by that time, in April 1938, 10dazzled by Hitler, I suppose that is the correct word, his 11achievements, full employment? 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No. Well ---- 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
National unification, the Czar land, all these great 14achievements, and that this is one reason why 99.8 per 15cent of people could easily be persuaded to sign "yes" to 16Adolf? 17A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think if you read the SD and by day reports carefully it 18is clear that fairly soon after 1933 there was quite 19widespread grumbling and discontent. That is a slightly 20different matter from what people thought about the union 21of Germany and Austria. I think, for what it is worth, 22that ---- 23Q.
[Mr Irving]
There was a plebiscite, was there not? 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
May I finish, Mr Irving? That in the vote a plebiscite on 25the union of Germany and Austria in 1938, in a wholly free 26election, it is more than likely that there would have

. P-194

1been a "yes". In other words, the majority of people in 2Germany and Austria were in favour of unions, but I do not 3think it is 99.8 per cent. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes, but what you think of course is not evidence. 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not think -- I mean can you name me any free, fully 6free, fair and secret election in which any side has 99.8 7per cent of the vote? 8MR JUSTICE GRAY: We are going rather ---- 9MR IRVING: We are going round in circles. 10MR JUSTICE GRAY: --- long. That is the Anschluss vote. I did 11not realize that. 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 13MR IRVING: It was not an election, my Lord. It was a 14plebiscite. 15A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
There was a Reichstag election at the same time. What you 16say, Mr Irving, is that he got 49 million Germans to vote 17for him, which is 99.8 per cent of electorate. 18MR JUSTICE GRAY: Can I just ---- 19MR IRVING: Can I ask you, are you familiar with the wording of 20the vote? 21MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, will you listen to me for a 22moment, because I think we probably have spent long enough 23on the 99.8 per cent. There is a danger I think, and this 24is designed to help you, that we are missing the wood for 25the trees. The whole of this section of the report, which 26I think myself is quite important, is on the theme or the

. P-195

1thesis that you always write about Hitler in terms which 2portray him favourably. Various examples are given of 3that and various statements made by you which tend to 4confirm are recited by Professor Evans. 5 I personally would find it more helpful if you 6were, perhaps to begin with, to ask a few rather more 7general questions in which you would set out what your own 8case is about this. I do not know, but could you not ask 9Professor Evans whether it is not right that actually you 10are very balanced and objective in what you write about 11Hitler? I think you need to set the scene. 12MR IRVING: My Lord, we know precisely what the answer will be 13if I ask that. He will say he dislikes me. He has never 14read the book. He would never have read the book if he 15had not received this commission from these instructing 16solicitors. So that would be, frankly, in my submission, 17a waste of the court's time. 18MR JUSTICE GRAY: Then you would follow it up, would you not, 19and give some examples, and this is really what I am 20asking you for, of events, significant events, when you 21take a critical line about what Hitler said or did. That 22is what I am missing at the moment. We are just going 23down this slightly blind alley of the 99.8 per cent 24Reichstag vote, whereas one is missing your putting the 25case in rather broader terms. I am only putting it 26forward as a suggestion. You do not have to follow it,

. P-196

1but it would help me if you were to do that. 2MR IRVING: My method, my Lord, an you may think it totally 3wrong, has been to graze through this passage and come 4across these occasionally indigestible rocks where he 5picks on something where I know I am right and where your 6Lordship probably does not appreciate that I am right. By 7virtue of this cross-examination trying to establish it 8firmly in your Lordship's mind that out of us two experts, 9if I can put it like that, on balance, probably I am 10better right or righter than he is. 11MR JUSTICE GRAY: If I may say so, if that is what you are 12planning to do for the next 550 pages of this report, I am 13not going to find that helpful. I am sure you are going 14to find, as you indeed have already found, a number of 15instances where Professor Evans has got it wrong. But 16I am not really helped by that. I need to look at it in 17much broader terms than that. 18MR IRVING: We are just coming in fact to the 19Reichskristallnacht, and I did promise that we were going 20to make substantial inroads into that today. 21MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, but I personally think the section on 22what is called "Admiration of Hitler" is quite important, 23and you do not really seem to have grasped the nettle of 24what is being said about you by Professor Evans. That is 25all I am inviting you to consider. 26MR IRVING: I have looked at the Night of Long Knives.

. P-197

1MR JUSTICE GRAY: True you did. I accept that. 2MR IRVING: Which was one matter. I thought I read your 3Lordship's mind to be that I should not deal with every 4single episode. 5MR JUSTICE GRAY: We are now getting into the meat of the 6report, and certainly not every single episode. There we 7are. I have said what I have said. 8MR IRVING: Just one final matter on the plebiscite. Do you 9know the wording that was on the ballot? You say this was 10not a plebiscite for Hitler personally. Do you know the 11wording on the ballot form, on the ballot paper? 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, do read it to me. Remind me. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
Does it say words to the effect of: I personally approve 14of Adolf Hitler as Chancellor of the greater German Reich 15and Austria combined and approve of the union of these two 16countries? 17A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, those are the terms in which it is put. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
It is in terms of personal approbation of Adolf Hitler 19then as a person? 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Indeed the propaganda effort also emphasised that apsect 21of it, but of course it was not purely, simply a vote 22about Hitler. The key part of it was the union of or the 23creation of the greater German Reich of Germany and 24Austria. 25MR IRVING: My Lord, your Lordship does not wish me to look at 26the Putsch of 1923 and the Hoffman episode again. We have

. P-198

1been over that already with the other witnesses. We now 2come on to page 233 to the night of broken glass. 3MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am sorry, Mr Irving, the last thing I want 4to do is to prolong this, but if you remember the heart of 5Professor Evans' report is that the chain of documents 6which you rely on as establishing that Hitler did not have 7any knowledge of, let alone authorization for, the Final 8Solution, can be at every link in the chain, as it were, 9attacked. My understanding of the structure of this 10report is that a step in the chain of reasoning, if I can 11put it that way, does indeed start with the 1924 trial and 12you were going to omit that altogether. 13MR IRVING: My Lord, the chain of documents episode starts on 14page 220. 15MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, quite. 16MR IRVING: That is where his heading starts. 17MR JUSTICE GRAY: The first link in the chain is the 1924 18trial, is it not? 19MR IRVING: It is the 1924 trial. If I had appreciated this 20witness's remarks and under cross-examination by 21Mr Rampton your Lordship will remember that we elicited 22the fact that I was relying on a different set of 23documents on the original microfilm version of the trial, 24I did not use the published text. 25A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Can I just comment on that, my Lord? They are the same. 26The published text is the complete verbatim transcript.

. P-199

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
Can you go back to page 230, please? You say that 2Hofmann's testimony of Hitler's trial has little 3credibility. Is this your view? 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
You base that view you on the fact that Hofmann was a Nazi 6party member? 7A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. As I say, a long-standing Nazi supporter and party 8official, tried to present Hitler in a favourable light as 9a law-abiding citizen. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes, and you suggest that I ought to have known that fact? 11A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Indeed I think you did know that fact, Mr Irving. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
On what document or evidence do you base your suggestion 13that I knew that fact? 14A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
On the evidence of Hofmann. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
On the evidence of Hofmann? 16A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
In other words, what he himself stated in this trial? 18MR JUSTICE GRAY: And who was he was? 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That is right, yes. Well, he says in the course of his 20evidence that he was -- first of all, the court says at 21the beginning of the transcript of his evidence that he 22had a close relationship with Hitler and was involved in 23the Putsch, and therefore should hot be required to give 24evidence on oath. That is the first pointer. Then he 25goes on to say that he was, and I quote all of this in my 26report ----

. P-200

1MR IRVING: Yes, but ---- 2A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
--- that he was the head of the Nazi Political 3Intelligence Unit. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
The question is ---- 5A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
That he was frequently with Hitler, and that he took part 6in the Putsch. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
The question is, what evidence do you have that that 8evidence was before me when I wrote my book on Hermann 9Goring? 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Because you read the transcript, you read the transcript 11of the trial which is where the evidence is. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
What evidence do you have that I read those pages of the 13trial? 14A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It is not a very long testimony and you recount what you 15must have done, I cannot believe you did anything else, 16was to start at the beginning of Hofmann's testimony and 17go on to the end. 18MR JUSTICE GRAY: If your case is, Mr Irving, that you did not 19ever read Hofmann's testimony, then you should put that 20because that would be an explanation. 21MR IRVING: I hope that I was making that point, my Lord. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: You were not. You were careful not to put it 23quite that way. You said: Have you got any got evidence 24that I had Hofmann's testimony in front of me? If your 25case is that you never read it, I think you should put 26that.

. P-201

1MR IRVING: If I can explain to your Lordship, my problem is 2that the entire Hermann Goring book was written on an old 3fashioned Xerox word processor. I am having those disks 4converted and I can then prove exactly what part of the 5testimony was before me, but they have still not been 6converted yet. It is just a technical problem. But I 7will now put the question to the witness in this way. 8 Was there any evidence before you that I had 9read the Hofmann testimony? 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
The evidence of your book, yes. You quote the testimony 11in the book. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
Was there any evidence before you that I had read that 13part of the testimony relating to his Nazi party 14membership and to his closeness to Hitler on which you are 15relying? 16A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It is not a very lengthy testimony, Mr Irving. It takes 17about I suppose ten minutes to read it. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
Did you read this in a printed book or did you read it on 19the microfilm? 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I just said that they are the same. I have read it in a 21volume, a multi-volume or a very large collection of 22documentary presentation edited by people on the staff of 23the Institute for Contemporary History in Munich. 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
Can I ask you, did this printed volume have an index with 25names in it? 26A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I think so, yes.

. P-202

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
Do my microfilms with 8,000 pages on film have an index 2with names on it? 3A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, but it is not difficult to ---- 4MR RAMPTON: My Lord, I am afraid I think again we are going 5out into outer space. In cross-examination on 31st 6January, page 61, Mr Irving said to me: "I knew nothing 7about Hofmann's background that was not before the court. 8I read the entire court transcript which was many 9thousands of pages which was adequate for writing a 10biography of Hermann Goring." 11MR IRVING: Yes. Do you accept that if some ---- 12MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is why I think it is important. 13MR IRVING: I will now clarify this matter. 14MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think that bears out, if I may say so, the 15correctness of what I said to you. If your case was that 16you had never read the testimony, then you ought to have 17put it. But it now turns out that actually you have 18already conceded that you read the whole thing. 19MR IRVING: Professor Evans, when somebody reads an 8,000 page 20transcript of a trial for the purposes of writing a 21biography of a very minor character in that trial, is he 22going, in your opinion, to pay attention to the background 23of every single witness who gives evidence at that trial? 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, Mr Irving, you read the entire transcript. You read 25all of Hofmann's testimony, which is fairly brief. You 26use it in your ----

. P-203

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
Would you estimate to the court how brief this testimony 2was in terms of typescript pages? 3MR JUSTICE GRAY: So it takes ten minutes to read, I think? 4A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, something like that. I have actually read it. 5MR RAMPTON: My Lord, again I intervene. I think sometimes 6I live in a parallel universe. I asked Mr Irving in 7cross-examination what that passage in the book was where 8he says that Goring goggled at the exchange between Hitler 9and the young lieutenant. 10MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, I remember. 11MR RAMPTON: Mr Irving said: "That was Hofmann, was it, that 12testified about that? Answer: Yes. Yes, the whole 13episode is based on Hofmann." 14MR IRVING: The fact that the whole episode is based on Hofmann 15does not presuppose that one has read the whole of Hofmann 16with great detail as to his origins, his party membership 17number and all the other matters on which Professor Evans 18is relying. 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, I have the typed pages here. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
The printed pages or the typescript pages? 21A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, the printed pages. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think we now know that they are the same. 23A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
The printed version is called [German] which is the 24verbatim account of the principal proceedings before the 25people's court at Munich 1, and Hofmann, in other words, 26it is a verbatim account, it is the same. Hofmann's

. P-204

1testimony begins on this printed version, that is on 2seventh day, it begins on page 540, and goes on to page 3545 I think, a little bit further. It is really not very 4long. In any case, Mr Irving, if you read the entire 58,000 pages you certainly must have read those handful of 6pages. 7MR IRVING: Will you accept that when one reads 8,000 pages of 8a transcript of a treason trial one is not paying 9attention to the political background of the individual 10members? 11A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, certainly not. It is extremely important. You 12present yourself as a professional historian who has an 13extremely critical attitude towards written evidence, 14particularly in trial testimonies as it happens, and here 15you have the testimony of somebody in an important trial 16of Hitler in 1924, a fairly brief testimony, and this is 17somebody who is the head of a political intelligence 18section of the Nazi party who is with Hitler a great deal, 19who is quite clearly a Nazi party member, so closely 20associated with the Nazis and with the Putsch that the 21court actually mentions the fact; at the beginning and at 22the end the judge congratulates Hofmann for being so loyal 23to his Fuhrer. This right through the evidence, Hofmann 24makes no secret of it all in his evidence, and you 25suppress this entirely. You present the evidence of this 26police officer as an entirely neutral statement. You

. P-205

1suppress, you deliberately suppress these facts which you 2must have known from having read this report. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
Must have known and ought to have known, is this 4sufficient evidence for you, Professor, when you write 5your books? 6A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I cannot put myself inside your mind when you are reading 7this stuff and say whether or not you closed your eyes 8when it came to the passages where all these things are 9mentioned. Even if you did that, even if you fell asleep 10repeatedly during reading this five or six-page account, 11I cannot really believe, it still seems to me that it is 12more than irresponsible. You have suppressed this 13information. You have not presented it to the reader. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
Precisely what information have I suppressed, the fact 15that he was a Nazi party member, that he was on Hitler's 16staff, is that what you are saying? 17A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes . 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
Does this render him incapable of speaking under oath the 19truth? 20A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Can you show to me the passage in your book where you 21mention these facts which is necessary for an assessment 22of the reliability of his evidence? 23Q.
[Mr Irving]
Does it render him incapable of speaking truth under oath 24in a case like this? 25A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
As the court recognized, he did not speak the truth under 26oath. It dispensed him of having to take the oath because

. P-206

1he was regarded as a biased witness. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
When you translate the passage, "Es ist ein schones 3Zeichen von Ihnen, wenn Sie zu Gunsten Ihres Fuhrers 4aussagen", you translated that as: It is a nice testimony 5to you, that you are speaking out on behalf of your 6leader." What is the German for "testimony"? 7A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I can put a nice sign of you, that is fine, it just does 8not sound quite right in English. 9Q.
[Mr Irving]
What is the German for "testimony"? Is it "zoitnes"? 10A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Something like that, yes. 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
So you have mistranslated a word there? 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No, I disagree. I am trying to find something that reads 13reasonably well in English. I think the meaning is the 14same. Can you just to point to me the page? 15MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, I cannot find it. 16MR IRVING: Page 230, paragraph 2, the last line. 17A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, if you want to do it literally it is a beautiful sign 18of you when or if you speak out in favour of your leader. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
That would be a bit wooden. 20MR JUSTICE GRAY: It reflects well on you? 21A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It reflects well on you. It is a nice testimony to you. 22I do not mean by using the word -- may I just fish, Mr 23Irving? I do not mean by using the word "testimony" it 24has anything to do with the testimony he has given. 25MR IRVING: But it would be a bit wooden, would it not, that 26translation if you were to translate it with sign and all

. P-207

1the rest of it? 2A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, it would. "It is a beautiful sign of yours". I am 3trying to steer a course here between -- we have spoken 4about this before. 5MR JUSTICE GRAY: It is a free translation, but it is an 6entirely accurate one. 7MR IRVING: You appreciate the point I am trying to make, your 8Lordship? 9MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do, but I am afraid I am not very impressed 10by it. 11MR IRVING: Not impressed by it? The fact that one is inclined 12to take liberties in a literary sense with a sentence in 13order to make it more legible. 14MR JUSTICE GRAY: As long as you get the flavour of what is 15being said right. 16MR IRVING: Is not the correct translation of that sentence 17"good for you, good for you that you are speaking out on 18before of your leader"? 19A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
No. 20MR JUSTICE GRAY: Not quite. 21A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
If I may say so, the judge was obviously rather pompous 22and says it in this rather kind of convoluted pompous way, 23not in that colloquial manner. 24MR IRVING: Is it not exactly the same as when his Lordship 25says things like, "You have done rather well, Mr Irving",, 26for example, as his Lordship did yesterday, we take it at

. P-208

1face value and it is not something to be taken all that 2literally? 3A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
What he says is, "It is a beautiful sign of you when you 4or it is a nice testimony to you or good for you", if you 5want to put it colloquially, "it is not just good for you 6or you have done well; it is good for you that you are 7speaking out on behalf of your leader", that is what he is 8saying, your leader. It is quite clear the presiding 9judge regards ---- 10MR IRVING: But he is not actually saying ---- 11A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
--- regards -- may I finish, Mr Irving? May I just 12finish? 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
But you carry on and on and on? 14MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, come on. This is a witness who is 15trying to answer a point you have made and let he him 16finish, if he can remember where he had got to. 17A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
It is quite clear the judge knows from the start to finish 18that Hofmann, that Hitler is Hofmann's leader and he 19treats the evidence accordingly. 20MR IRVING: Is it not just a throw away remark by his Lordship 21in this case to put this witness at his ease, and that is 22exactly what happens again and again and again in the 23courtroom, and you have put all this pompous significance 24on to it in order to try to undermine the value of this 25police sergeant who is doing his job? 26A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
First of all, I agree of course that it is intended to

. P-209

1make, it is a nice comment, the judge is trying to be nice 2to Hofmann. After all, Hofmann whose has not been treated 3very well. He has not been allowed to present evidence on 4oath. He has been told that he is too heavily involved in 5the whole thing, but he says, "it is your leader", and it 6is quite clear to anybody who reads this rather brief 7section of testimony that everybody is perfectly well 8aware that this man's evidence is tainted, because Hitler 9is his leader, not just because of that statement, but 10also because, as he says, he was with Hitler frequently, 11he was head of the political section of the Nazi party's 12Intelligence Unit, participated in the Putsch, accompanied 13Hitler for most of the evening of the Putsch. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
But cutting to the bottom line, is there any reason to 15believe that this witness made the whole story up? Is 16there any reason, any subjective or objective reason why 17we should accept that he made the whole story up? 18A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Which story? 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
The story about how he had been a witness of Hitler, 20ticking off this lieutenant and throwing him out of the 21party? 22A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
There is a serious reason to distrust that testimony. 23Q.
[Mr Irving]
Purely on the basis of the fact he was a Nazi ---- 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I do not think it was taken very seriously by the court, 25and I think that a responsible author has to present this 26particular problem to the readership. If you want to make

. P-210

1use of Hofmann's evidence you simply have to say that he 2is heavily involved in the Putsch, he is a Nazi party 3supporter and is regarded as such by the court. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
Your final criticism is that I do not give proper source 5notes for this, is that correct? 6A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. Where is this? 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, that I failed to provide a proper footnote 8reference. It is the bottom of page 230. 9A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is that a serious criticism or is just your irritation 11that you had to go and look in the index of your printed 12edition of this trial? 13A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Well, it is more than that. I think that you have made it 14deliberately difficult for people to go and check it out. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
I have made it deliberately difficult? 16A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
In what way? 18A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Do you want to have a look at the footnote reference which 19you provide or do not provide? 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is it not correct that I give the reference as being 21microfilm version of the trial of the Bavarian people 22against Adolf Hitler and others? 23A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes, that is 8,000 pages, as you said, Mr Irving. I do 24think that simply referring to an 8,000 page collection 25does make it difficult. You could, for example, easily 26have put the day on which it occurred and given a frame

. P-211

1number, if there are frame numbers, or a real number, if 2there are real numbers. There are ways in which you can 3be more precise. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
Will you take it from me that the American publisher 5William Morrow asked me to cut 2,000 lines out the proofs 6of this book. In other words, at proof stage, they said, 7Mr Irving, please cut 2,000 lines out of this book. Can 8you accept that? 9A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I would have to see the documentary evidence of that. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
Very well. If that was the case, what are the first 11places that you would be tempted to make the cuts? 12A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
I agree of course in the footnotes. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
In the footnotes? 14A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
But in that case I think you still have to abbreviate 15footnotes. You have to provide footnote references which 16will enable other people to go and check up what you have 17written. You could have, you know, done this in such a 18way as to achieve that object. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
So, in summary, on the case of this policeman Hoffmann 20your allegations against me rest on the statement that 21I ought to have known, or ought to have noticed, there was 22a Nazi party member and I ought to---- 23MR RAMPTON: No, my Lord, he did not say "ought to", he said 24"must have", which is quite different. 25A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
Yes. He did know. 26MR IRVING: Very well. In that case I have to ask again, on

. P-212

1what evidence---- 2MR JUSTICE GRAY: We have been all over that, Mr Irving, 3really. 4MR IRVING: Do you have any evidence that I did know? 5MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, Mr Rampton has just reminded you 6that you accepted that you had read the whole of the trial 7evidence, including Hoffmann. 8MR IRVING: Has your Lordship any idea of how many words there 9are on 8,000 pages of transcript? 10MR JUSTICE GRAY: You have just been through that point. 11MR IRVING: Yes, but the fact that one reads 8,000 pages of 12transcript with no doubt many millions of words does not 13mean to say that one knows everything that is stated about 14every person in that transcript. 15MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, what I am going to suggest is that 16you read the transcript of the last 20 minutes again 17perhaps, if you have time between now and tomorrow, and 18I think you will understand why I think you will not do 19any good to your case by going all over it again. 20MR IRVING: Well ---- 21A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
The answer to your question, Mr Irving, is no, my case 22against you here does not rest solely on that. 23MR IRVING: On Hoffmann? 24A.
[Professor Richard John Evans]
On the fact that you suppressed your knowledge of the bias 25in his testimony. I also, as you know, say that you 26manipulate what he said.

. P-213

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
What is your evidence for the fact that he was biased in 2his testimony? 3MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think that question has been asked and 4answered sufficiently. 5MR IRVING: Except that he stated it as a fact, and of course 6it is an opinion. 7MR JUSTICE GRAY: In a sense it is perhaps neither. It is an 8inference from all the circumstances. 9MR IRVING: A possible bias, this is true. We now pass to 10Reichskristallnacht, page 233. 11MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, I accept that it is slightly my 12fault that we spent the last 20 plus minutes on the 1924 13trial, but frankly I think it was vital that you did 14address that. But, having got to ten past 4, would it be 15sensible to start on Kristallnacht tomorrow morning? 16MR IRVING: It would be sensible, my Lord. Perhaps I can wave 17a little flag and say I shall reserve the right to come 18back to Hoffmann on a later occasion with more material, 19as your Lordship obviously attaches more significance to 20it than I do. 21MR JUSTICE GRAY: Only because is it one of the chain of 22documents. 23MR IRVING: I intend dealing with the chain of documents in 24sequence on a different occasion, I think. It makes more 25sense. 26MR JUSTICE GRAY: Can I say in advance that I am going to have

. P-214

1to rise just a little bit early tomorrow, say about 24 o'clock rather than 4.15. 10.30 tomorrow. 3< (The witness withdrew). 4(The court adjourned until the following day) 5 6 7 8 91011121314151617181920212223242526